Re: strange failure in plpgsql_control tests (on fulmar, ICC 14.0.3)

On March 17, 2018 11:32:36 AM PDT, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>> On the current branch just using the new overflow safe functions in
>> int.h should work. But unless we are OK leaving this broken in the
>back
>> branches, or want to backport the functionality, that's probably not
>> sufficient.
>
>Yeah ... I don't like either of the last two things, so probably we
>should
>go with the patch as I had it.  Yours might perform a shade better on
>compilers with the built-in, but it'll be a lot worse on those without.

I don't think performance is a prime driver here, or shouldn't be at least. Obviousness / grepability seem much more
important. I'd vote for using my version in master, and yours in the back branches.  I can do that, of you want. 

I'm OK with skipping the test for now.

Andres

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.