]> granicus.if.org Git - postgresql/blobdiff - src/backend/utils/adt/int8.c
Remove all the special-case code for INT64_IS_BUSTED, per decision that
[postgresql] / src / backend / utils / adt / int8.c
index 7e1675227df70897fff2390f5b3488240d791bad..6707b79e5485cc65b86ad7f29e57cebd34937b3a 100644 (file)
@@ -3,25 +3,37 @@
  * int8.c
  *       Internal 64-bit integer operations
  *
- * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2003, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
+ * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2010, PostgreSQL Global Development Group
  * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
  *
  * IDENTIFICATION
- *       $Header: /cvsroot/pgsql/src/backend/utils/adt/int8.c,v 1.48 2003/09/25 06:58:04 petere Exp $
+ *       $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/utils/adt/int8.c,v 1.77 2010/01/07 04:53:34 tgl Exp $
  *
  *-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  */
 #include "postgres.h"
 
 #include <ctype.h>
+#include <limits.h>
 #include <math.h>
 
+#include "funcapi.h"
 #include "libpq/pqformat.h"
+#include "nodes/nodes.h"
 #include "utils/int8.h"
 
 
 #define MAXINT8LEN             25
 
+#define SAMESIGN(a,b)  (((a) < 0) == ((b) < 0))
+
+typedef struct
+{
+       int64           current;
+       int64           finish;
+       int64           step;
+} generate_series_fctx;
+
 
 /***********************************************************************
  **
@@ -47,8 +59,8 @@ scanint8(const char *str, bool errorOK, int64 *result)
        int                     sign = 1;
 
        /*
-        * Do our own scan, rather than relying on sscanf which might be
-        * broken for long long.
+        * Do our own scan, rather than relying on sscanf which might be broken
+        * for long long.
         */
 
        /* skip leading spaces */
@@ -59,20 +71,18 @@ scanint8(const char *str, bool errorOK, int64 *result)
        if (*ptr == '-')
        {
                ptr++;
-               sign = -1;
 
                /*
                 * Do an explicit check for INT64_MIN.  Ugly though this is, it's
-                * cleaner than trying to get the loop below to handle it
-                * portably.
+                * cleaner than trying to get the loop below to handle it portably.
                 */
-#ifndef INT64_IS_BUSTED
-               if (strcmp(ptr, "9223372036854775808") == 0)
+               if (strncmp(ptr, "9223372036854775808", 19) == 0)
                {
-                       *result = -INT64CONST(0x7fffffffffffffff) - 1;
-                       return true;
+                       tmp = -INT64CONST(0x7fffffffffffffff) - 1;
+                       ptr += 19;
+                       goto gotdigits;
                }
-#endif
+               sign = -1;
        }
        else if (*ptr == '+')
                ptr++;
@@ -85,7 +95,8 @@ scanint8(const char *str, bool errorOK, int64 *result)
                else
                        ereport(ERROR,
                                        (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_TEXT_REPRESENTATION),
-                                 errmsg("invalid input syntax for type bigint: \"%s\"", str)));
+                                        errmsg("invalid input syntax for integer: \"%s\"",
+                                                       str)));
        }
 
        /* process digits */
@@ -100,20 +111,27 @@ scanint8(const char *str, bool errorOK, int64 *result)
                        else
                                ereport(ERROR,
                                                (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
-                                                errmsg("integer out of range")));
+                                          errmsg("value \"%s\" is out of range for type bigint",
+                                                         str)));
                }
                tmp = newtmp;
        }
 
-       /* trailing junk? */
-       if (*ptr)
+gotdigits:
+
+       /* allow trailing whitespace, but not other trailing chars */
+       while (*ptr != '\0' && isspace((unsigned char) *ptr))
+               ptr++;
+
+       if (*ptr != '\0')
        {
                if (errorOK)
                        return false;
                else
                        ereport(ERROR,
                                        (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_TEXT_REPRESENTATION),
-                                 errmsg("invalid input syntax for type bigint: \"%s\"", str)));
+                                        errmsg("invalid input syntax for integer: \"%s\"",
+                                                       str)));
        }
 
        *result = (sign < 0) ? -tmp : tmp;
@@ -474,58 +492,124 @@ int28ge(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 int8um(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           result;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(-val);
+       result = -arg;
+       /* overflow check (needed for INT64_MIN) */
+       if (arg != 0 && SAMESIGN(result, arg))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int8up(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val);
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(arg);
 }
 
 Datum
 int8pl(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 + arg2;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 + val2);
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of different signs then their sum
+        * cannot overflow.  If the inputs are of the same sign, their sum had
+        * better be that sign too.
+        */
+       if (SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int8mi(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 - arg2;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 - val2);
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of the same sign then their
+        * difference cannot overflow.  If they are of different signs then the
+        * result should be of the same sign as the first input.
+        */
+       if (!SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int8mul(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 * arg2;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 * val2);
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      We basically check to see if result / arg2 gives arg1
+        * again.  There are two cases where this fails: arg2 = 0 (which cannot
+        * overflow) and arg1 = INT64_MIN, arg2 = -1 (where the division itself
+        * will overflow and thus incorrectly match).
+        *
+        * Since the division is likely much more expensive than the actual
+        * multiplication, we'd like to skip it where possible.  The best bang for
+        * the buck seems to be to check whether both inputs are in the int32
+        * range; if so, no overflow is possible.
+        */
+       if (arg1 != (int64) ((int32) arg1) || arg2 != (int64) ((int32) arg2))
+       {
+               if (arg2 != 0 &&
+                       (result / arg2 != arg1 || (arg2 == -1 && arg1 < 0 && result < 0)))
+                       ereport(ERROR,
+                                       (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                        errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       }
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int8div(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
 
-       if (val2 == 0)
+       if (arg2 == 0)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO),
                                 errmsg("division by zero")));
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 / val2);
+       result = arg1 / arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      The only possible overflow case is for arg1 =
+        * INT64_MIN, arg2 = -1, where the correct result is -INT64_MIN, which
+        * can't be represented on a two's-complement machine.  Most machines
+        * produce INT64_MIN but it seems some produce zero.
+        */
+       if (arg2 == -1 && arg1 < 0 && result <= 0)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 /* int8abs()
@@ -535,8 +619,15 @@ Datum
 int8abs(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
        int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           result;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64((arg1 < 0) ? -arg1 : arg1);
+       result = (arg1 < 0) ? -arg1 : arg1;
+       /* overflow check (needed for INT64_MIN) */
+       if (result < 0)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 /* int8mod()
@@ -545,59 +636,95 @@ int8abs(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 int8mod(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
-       int64           result;
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
 
-       if (val2 == 0)
+       if (arg2 == 0)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO),
                                 errmsg("division by zero")));
+       /* No overflow is possible */
 
-       result = val1 / val2;
-       result *= val2;
-       result = val1 - result;
-
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(arg1 % arg2);
 }
 
-/* int8fac()
- * Factorial
- */
+
 Datum
-int8fac(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+int8inc(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           result;
-       int64           i;
+       /*
+        * When int8 is pass-by-reference, we provide this special case to avoid
+        * palloc overhead for COUNT(): when called from nodeAgg, we know that the
+        * argument is modifiable local storage, so just update it in-place. (If
+        * int8 is pass-by-value, then of course this is useless as well as
+        * incorrect, so just ifdef it out.)
+        */
+#ifndef USE_FLOAT8_BYVAL               /* controls int8 too */
+       if (fcinfo->context &&
+               (IsA(fcinfo->context, AggState) ||
+                IsA(fcinfo->context, WindowAggState)))
+       {
+               int64      *arg = (int64 *) PG_GETARG_POINTER(0);
+               int64           result;
+
+               result = *arg + 1;
+               /* Overflow check */
+               if (result < 0 && *arg > 0)
+                       ereport(ERROR,
+                                       (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                        errmsg("bigint out of range")));
 
-       if (arg1 == 0)
-               result = 1;
-       else if (arg1 < 1)
-               result = 0;
+               *arg = result;
+               PG_RETURN_POINTER(arg);
+       }
        else
-               for (i = arg1, result = 1; i > 0; --i)
-                       result *= i;
+#endif
+       {
+               /* Not called by nodeAgg, so just do it the dumb way */
+               int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+               int64           result;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+               result = arg + 1;
+               /* Overflow check */
+               if (result < 0 && arg > 0)
+                       ereport(ERROR,
+                                       (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                        errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+
+               PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+       }
 }
 
+/*
+ * These functions are exactly like int8inc but are used for aggregates that
+ * count only non-null values. Since the functions are declared strict,
+ * the null checks happen before we ever get here, and all we need do is
+ * increment the state value.  We could actually make these pg_proc entries
+ * point right at int8inc, but then the opr_sanity regression test would
+ * complain about mismatched entries for a built-in function.
+ */
+
 Datum
-int8inc(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+int8inc_any(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       return int8inc(fcinfo);
+}
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(arg + 1);
+Datum
+int8inc_float8_float8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       return int8inc(fcinfo);
 }
 
+
 Datum
 int8larger(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
        int64           result;
 
-       result = ((val1 > val2) ? val1 : val2);
+       result = ((arg1 > arg2) ? arg1 : arg2);
 
        PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
@@ -605,11 +732,11 @@ int8larger(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 int8smaller(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
        int64           result;
 
-       result = ((val1 < val2) ? val1 : val2);
+       result = ((arg1 < arg2) ? arg1 : arg2);
 
        PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
@@ -617,83 +744,369 @@ int8smaller(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 int84pl(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int32           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int32           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           result;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 + val2);
+       result = arg1 + arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of different signs then their sum
+        * cannot overflow.  If the inputs are of the same sign, their sum had
+        * better be that sign too.
+        */
+       if (SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int84mi(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int32           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int32           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 - arg2;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 - val2);
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of the same sign then their
+        * difference cannot overflow.  If they are of different signs then the
+        * result should be of the same sign as the first input.
+        */
+       if (!SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int84mul(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int32           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int32           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 * arg2;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 * val2);
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      We basically check to see if result / arg1 gives arg2
+        * again.  There is one case where this fails: arg1 = 0 (which cannot
+        * overflow).
+        *
+        * Since the division is likely much more expensive than the actual
+        * multiplication, we'd like to skip it where possible.  The best bang for
+        * the buck seems to be to check whether both inputs are in the int32
+        * range; if so, no overflow is possible.
+        */
+       if (arg1 != (int64) ((int32) arg1) &&
+               result / arg1 != arg2)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int84div(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
-       int32           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int32           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT32(1);
+       int64           result;
 
-       if (val2 == 0)
+       if (arg2 == 0)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO),
                                 errmsg("division by zero")));
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 / val2);
+       result = arg1 / arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      The only possible overflow case is for arg1 =
+        * INT64_MIN, arg2 = -1, where the correct result is -INT64_MIN, which
+        * can't be represented on a two's-complement machine.  Most machines
+        * produce INT64_MIN but it seems some produce zero.
+        */
+       if (arg2 == -1 && arg1 < 0 && result <= 0)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int48pl(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int32           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int32           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 + val2);
+       result = arg1 + arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of different signs then their sum
+        * cannot overflow.  If the inputs are of the same sign, their sum had
+        * better be that sign too.
+        */
+       if (SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int48mi(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int32           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int32           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 - val2);
+       result = arg1 - arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of the same sign then their
+        * difference cannot overflow.  If they are of different signs then the
+        * result should be of the same sign as the first input.
+        */
+       if (!SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int48mul(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int32           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int32           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 * arg2;
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 * val2);
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      We basically check to see if result / arg2 gives arg1
+        * again.  There is one case where this fails: arg2 = 0 (which cannot
+        * overflow).
+        *
+        * Since the division is likely much more expensive than the actual
+        * multiplication, we'd like to skip it where possible.  The best bang for
+        * the buck seems to be to check whether both inputs are in the int32
+        * range; if so, no overflow is possible.
+        */
+       if (arg2 != (int64) ((int32) arg2) &&
+               result / arg2 != arg1)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
 
 Datum
 int48div(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int32           val1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
-       int64           val2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int32           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
 
-       if (val2 == 0)
+       if (arg2 == 0)
+       {
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO),
                                 errmsg("division by zero")));
+               /* ensure compiler realizes we mustn't reach the division (gcc bug) */
+               PG_RETURN_NULL();
+       }
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64(val1 / val2);
+       /* No overflow is possible */
+       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) arg1 / arg2);
+}
+
+Datum
+int82pl(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int16           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT16(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 + arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of different signs then their sum
+        * cannot overflow.  If the inputs are of the same sign, their sum had
+        * better be that sign too.
+        */
+       if (SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+}
+
+Datum
+int82mi(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int16           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT16(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 - arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of the same sign then their
+        * difference cannot overflow.  If they are of different signs then the
+        * result should be of the same sign as the first input.
+        */
+       if (!SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+}
+
+Datum
+int82mul(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int16           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT16(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 * arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      We basically check to see if result / arg1 gives arg2
+        * again.  There is one case where this fails: arg1 = 0 (which cannot
+        * overflow).
+        *
+        * Since the division is likely much more expensive than the actual
+        * multiplication, we'd like to skip it where possible.  The best bang for
+        * the buck seems to be to check whether both inputs are in the int32
+        * range; if so, no overflow is possible.
+        */
+       if (arg1 != (int64) ((int32) arg1) &&
+               result / arg1 != arg2)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+}
+
+Datum
+int82div(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int64           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int16           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT16(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       if (arg2 == 0)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO),
+                                errmsg("division by zero")));
+
+       result = arg1 / arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      The only possible overflow case is for arg1 =
+        * INT64_MIN, arg2 = -1, where the correct result is -INT64_MIN, which
+        * can't be represented on a two's-complement machine.  Most machines
+        * produce INT64_MIN but it seems some produce zero.
+        */
+       if (arg2 == -1 && arg1 < 0 && result <= 0)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+}
+
+Datum
+int28pl(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int16           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT16(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 + arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of different signs then their sum
+        * cannot overflow.  If the inputs are of the same sign, their sum had
+        * better be that sign too.
+        */
+       if (SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+}
+
+Datum
+int28mi(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int16           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT16(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 - arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      If the inputs are of the same sign then their
+        * difference cannot overflow.  If they are of different signs then the
+        * result should be of the same sign as the first input.
+        */
+       if (!SAMESIGN(arg1, arg2) && !SAMESIGN(result, arg1))
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+}
+
+Datum
+int28mul(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int16           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT16(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+       int64           result;
+
+       result = arg1 * arg2;
+
+       /*
+        * Overflow check.      We basically check to see if result / arg2 gives arg1
+        * again.  There is one case where this fails: arg2 = 0 (which cannot
+        * overflow).
+        *
+        * Since the division is likely much more expensive than the actual
+        * multiplication, we'd like to skip it where possible.  The best bang for
+        * the buck seems to be to check whether both inputs are in the int32
+        * range; if so, no overflow is possible.
+        */
+       if (arg2 != (int64) ((int32) arg2) &&
+               result / arg2 != arg1)
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
+       PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
+}
+
+Datum
+int28div(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       int16           arg1 = PG_GETARG_INT16(0);
+       int64           arg2 = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+
+       if (arg2 == 0)
+       {
+               ereport(ERROR,
+                               (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO),
+                                errmsg("division by zero")));
+               /* ensure compiler realizes we mustn't reach the division (gcc bug) */
+               PG_RETURN_NULL();
+       }
+
+       /* No overflow is possible */
+       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) arg1 / arg2);
 }
 
 /* Binary arithmetics
@@ -766,21 +1179,21 @@ int8shr(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 int48(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int32           val = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
+       int32           arg = PG_GETARG_INT32(0);
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) val);
+       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) arg);
 }
 
 Datum
 int84(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
        int32           result;
 
-       result = (int32) val;
+       result = (int32) arg;
 
        /* Test for overflow by reverse-conversion. */
-       if ((int64) result != val)
+       if ((int64) result != arg)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
                                 errmsg("integer out of range")));
@@ -791,24 +1204,24 @@ int84(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 int28(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int16           val = PG_GETARG_INT16(0);
+       int16           arg = PG_GETARG_INT16(0);
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) val);
+       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) arg);
 }
 
 Datum
 int82(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
        int16           result;
 
-       result = (int16) val;
+       result = (int16) arg;
 
        /* Test for overflow by reverse-conversion. */
-       if ((int64) result != val)
+       if ((int64) result != arg)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
-                                errmsg("integer out of range")));
+                                errmsg("smallint out of range")));
 
        PG_RETURN_INT16(result);
 }
@@ -816,10 +1229,10 @@ int82(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 i8tod(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
        float8          result;
 
-       result = val;
+       result = arg;
 
        PG_RETURN_FLOAT8(result);
 }
@@ -830,23 +1243,23 @@ i8tod(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 dtoi8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       float8          val = PG_GETARG_FLOAT8(0);
+       float8          arg = PG_GETARG_FLOAT8(0);
        int64           result;
 
-       /* Round val to nearest integer (but it's still in float form) */
-       val = rint(val);
+       /* Round arg to nearest integer (but it's still in float form) */
+       arg = rint(arg);
 
        /*
-        * Does it fit in an int64?  Avoid assuming that we have handy
-        * constants defined for the range boundaries, instead test for
-        * overflow by reverse-conversion.
+        * Does it fit in an int64?  Avoid assuming that we have handy constants
+        * defined for the range boundaries, instead test for overflow by
+        * reverse-conversion.
         */
-       result = (int64) val;
+       result = (int64) arg;
 
-       if ((float8) result != val)
+       if ((float8) result != arg)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
-                                errmsg("integer out of range")));
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
 
        PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
@@ -854,10 +1267,10 @@ dtoi8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 i8tof(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
        float4          result;
 
-       result = val;
+       result = arg;
 
        PG_RETURN_FLOAT4(result);
 }
@@ -868,24 +1281,24 @@ i8tof(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 ftoi8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       float4          val = PG_GETARG_FLOAT4(0);
+       float4          arg = PG_GETARG_FLOAT4(0);
        int64           result;
-       float8          dval;
+       float8          darg;
 
-       /* Round val to nearest integer (but it's still in float form) */
-       dval = rint(val);
+       /* Round arg to nearest integer (but it's still in float form) */
+       darg = rint(arg);
 
        /*
-        * Does it fit in an int64?  Avoid assuming that we have handy
-        * constants defined for the range boundaries, instead test for
-        * overflow by reverse-conversion.
+        * Does it fit in an int64?  Avoid assuming that we have handy constants
+        * defined for the range boundaries, instead test for overflow by
+        * reverse-conversion.
         */
-       result = (int64) dval;
+       result = (int64) darg;
 
-       if ((float8) result != dval)
+       if ((float8) result != darg)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
-                                errmsg("integer out of range")));
+                                errmsg("bigint out of range")));
 
        PG_RETURN_INT64(result);
 }
@@ -893,13 +1306,13 @@ ftoi8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 i8tooid(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       int64           val = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+       int64           arg = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
        Oid                     result;
 
-       result = (Oid) val;
+       result = (Oid) arg;
 
        /* Test for overflow by reverse-conversion. */
-       if ((int64) result != val)
+       if ((int64) result != arg)
                ereport(ERROR,
                                (errcode(ERRCODE_NUMERIC_VALUE_OUT_OF_RANGE),
                                 errmsg("OID out of range")));
@@ -910,49 +1323,85 @@ i8tooid(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 Datum
 oidtoi8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       Oid                     val = PG_GETARG_OID(0);
+       Oid                     arg = PG_GETARG_OID(0);
 
-       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) val);
+       PG_RETURN_INT64((int64) arg);
 }
 
+/*
+ * non-persistent numeric series generator
+ */
 Datum
-text_int8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+generate_series_int8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
 {
-       text       *str = PG_GETARG_TEXT_P(0);
-       int                     len;
-       char       *s;
-       Datum           result;
+       return generate_series_step_int8(fcinfo);
+}
 
-       len = (VARSIZE(str) - VARHDRSZ);
-       s = palloc(len + 1);
-       memcpy(s, VARDATA(str), len);
-       *(s + len) = '\0';
+Datum
+generate_series_step_int8(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
+{
+       FuncCallContext *funcctx;
+       generate_series_fctx *fctx;
+       int64           result;
+       MemoryContext oldcontext;
 
-       result = DirectFunctionCall1(int8in, CStringGetDatum(s));
+       /* stuff done only on the first call of the function */
+       if (SRF_IS_FIRSTCALL())
+       {
+               int64           start = PG_GETARG_INT64(0);
+               int64           finish = PG_GETARG_INT64(1);
+               int64           step = 1;
+
+               /* see if we were given an explicit step size */
+               if (PG_NARGS() == 3)
+                       step = PG_GETARG_INT64(2);
+               if (step == 0)
+                       ereport(ERROR,
+                                       (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
+                                        errmsg("step size cannot equal zero")));
 
-       pfree(s);
+               /* create a function context for cross-call persistence */
+               funcctx = SRF_FIRSTCALL_INIT();
 
-       return result;
-}
+               /*
+                * switch to memory context appropriate for multiple function calls
+                */
+               oldcontext = MemoryContextSwitchTo(funcctx->multi_call_memory_ctx);
 
-Datum
-int8_text(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS)
-{
-       /* val is int64, but easier to leave it as Datum */
-       Datum           val = PG_GETARG_DATUM(0);
-       char       *s;
-       int                     len;
-       text       *result;
+               /* allocate memory for user context */
+               fctx = (generate_series_fctx *) palloc(sizeof(generate_series_fctx));
 
-       s = DatumGetCString(DirectFunctionCall1(int8out, val));
-       len = strlen(s);
+               /*
+                * Use fctx to keep state from call to call. Seed current with the
+                * original start value
+                */
+               fctx->current = start;
+               fctx->finish = finish;
+               fctx->step = step;
+
+               funcctx->user_fctx = fctx;
+               MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldcontext);
+       }
 
-       result = (text *) palloc(VARHDRSZ + len);
+       /* stuff done on every call of the function */
+       funcctx = SRF_PERCALL_SETUP();
 
-       VARATT_SIZEP(result) = len + VARHDRSZ;
-       memcpy(VARDATA(result), s, len);
+       /*
+        * get the saved state and use current as the result for this iteration
+        */
+       fctx = funcctx->user_fctx;
+       result = fctx->current;
 
-       pfree(s);
+       if ((fctx->step > 0 && fctx->current <= fctx->finish) ||
+               (fctx->step < 0 && fctx->current >= fctx->finish))
+       {
+               /* increment current in preparation for next iteration */
+               fctx->current += fctx->step;
 
-       PG_RETURN_TEXT_P(result);
+               /* do when there is more left to send */
+               SRF_RETURN_NEXT(funcctx, Int64GetDatum(result));
+       }
+       else
+               /* do when there is no more left */
+               SRF_RETURN_DONE(funcctx);
 }