Detect more overflows in timestamp[tz]_pl_interval.
commitcb0ccefa03d351d9c643362ac77fca7dadd9fc42
authorTom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sun, 28 Apr 2024 17:42:13 +0000 (28 13:42 -0400)
committerTom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sun, 28 Apr 2024 17:42:13 +0000 (28 13:42 -0400)
treed8dae0000a148370fa59e60a4fea9d0e44184773
parent6d4a17010740649a4dd51735ec28d29ef329bd5a
Detect more overflows in timestamp[tz]_pl_interval.

In commit 25cd2d640 I (tgl) opined that "The additions of the months
and microseconds fields could also overflow, of course.  However,
I believe we need no additional checks there; the existing range
checks should catch such cases".  This is demonstrably wrong however
for the microseconds field, and given that discovery it seems prudent
to be paranoid about the months addition as well.

Report and patch by Joseph Koshakow.  As before, back-patch to all
supported branches.  (However, the test case doesn't work before
v15 because we didn't allow wider-than-int32 numbers in interval
literals.  A variant test could probably be built that fits within
that restriction, but it didn't seem worth the trouble.)

Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAAvxfHf77sRHKoEzUw9_cMYSpbpNS2C+J_+8Dq4+0oi8iKopeA@mail.gmail.com
src/backend/utils/adt/timestamp.c