Re: BUG #17725: Sefault when seg_in() called with a large argument
От | John Naylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #17725: Sefault when seg_in() called with a large argument |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFBsxsEn0HgkvmX4J3mipZn_gdoF19dj8g-q9WdS76G4QO2cYA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BUG #17725: Sefault when seg_in() called with a large argument (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #17725: Sefault when seg_in() called with a large argument
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 4:28 PM PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
> PostgreSQL version: 15.1
> The following SQL Segfaults on master (tested on b3bb7d12af).
> Backtrace on ea5ae4cae6@REL_14_STABLE:
> SQL: SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31, 10000)))
> 2022-12-20 02:44:43.728 UTC [633388] DETAIL: Failed process was running:
> SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31,1000000)));
Neither query shows the reported problem in my environment on master (as of today) or v14, so not sure
=# SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31, 10000)));
seg_in
--------
3e1
(1 row)
=# SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31,1000000)));
seg_in
--------
3e1
(1 row)
It's possibly relevant that this result is different from the "3.100000e+01" which was shown in your backtrace. Since a few details of this report don't agree with each other, I'm starting to wonder if some other relevant details got lost along the way.
--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> PostgreSQL version: 15.1
> The following SQL Segfaults on master (tested on b3bb7d12af).
> Backtrace on ea5ae4cae6@REL_14_STABLE:
> SQL: SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31, 10000)))
> 2022-12-20 02:44:43.728 UTC [633388] DETAIL: Failed process was running:
> SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31,1000000)));
Neither query shows the reported problem in my environment on master (as of today) or v14, so not sure
=# SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31, 10000)));
seg_in
--------
3e1
(1 row)
=# SELECT seg_in(numeric_out(round(31,1000000)));
seg_in
--------
3e1
(1 row)
It's possibly relevant that this result is different from the "3.100000e+01" which was shown in your backtrace. Since a few details of this report don't agree with each other, I'm starting to wonder if some other relevant details got lost along the way.
--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: