BUG #19586: money division overflow
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 19586
Logged by: Michael Malis
Email address: malis@pgrust.com
PostgreSQL version: 18.4
Operating system: Linux x86_64 and Linux aarch64
Description:
cash_div_int64() in src/backend/utils/adt/cash.c guards against division by
zero but not against the INT64_MIN / -1 overflow:
cash_div_int64(Cash c, int64 i)
{
if (unlikely(i == 0))
ereport(ERROR, (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO), ...));
return c / i;
}
Commit 4f96281587 ("Add overflow checks to money type", 2024-07-19, fixing
bug
#18240) added pg_mul_s64_overflow() checks to cash_mul_int64() and the
float paths, but the division path was not covered.
Steps to reproduce
SELECT '-92233720368547758.08'::money / -1;
Actual results
On x86-64, the hardware division trap is caught by PostgreSQL's SIGFPE
handler and surfaces as a misleading error class for an integer overflow:
ERROR: floating-point exception
DETAIL: An invalid floating-point operation was signaled...
On aarch64, where the division does not trap, the wrong value is returned
silently, with no error:
-$92,233,720,368,547,758.08
i.e. a negative value divided by -1 remains negative.
Expected results
The same treatment int8div() already gives the identical arithmetic, on
every platform:
SELECT (-9223372036854775808)::bigint / -1;
ERROR: bigint out of range
Multiplication in the money type is already guarded and behaves correctly:
SELECT '-92233720368547758.08'::money * -1;
ERROR: money out of range
I would be happy to provide a patch.
Hi, Michael!
Thanks for the report.
Patch attached.
---
Regards,
Rachitskiy Andrey
ср, 29 июл. 2026 г. в 22:54, PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>:
Show quoted text
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 19586
Logged by: Michael Malis
Email address: malis@pgrust.com
PostgreSQL version: 18.4
Operating system: Linux x86_64 and Linux aarch64
Description:cash_div_int64() in src/backend/utils/adt/cash.c guards against division by
zero but not against the INT64_MIN / -1 overflow:cash_div_int64(Cash c, int64 i)
{
if (unlikely(i == 0))
ereport(ERROR, (errcode(ERRCODE_DIVISION_BY_ZERO), ...));
return c / i;
}Commit 4f96281587 ("Add overflow checks to money type", 2024-07-19, fixing
bug
#18240) added pg_mul_s64_overflow() checks to cash_mul_int64() and the
float paths, but the division path was not covered.Steps to reproduce
SELECT '-92233720368547758.08'::money / -1;
Actual results
On x86-64, the hardware division trap is caught by PostgreSQL's SIGFPE
handler and surfaces as a misleading error class for an integer overflow:ERROR: floating-point exception
DETAIL: An invalid floating-point operation was signaled...
On aarch64, where the division does not trap, the wrong value is returned
silently, with no error:-$92,233,720,368,547,758.08
i.e. a negative value divided by -1 remains negative.Expected results
The same treatment int8div() already gives the identical arithmetic, on
every platform:SELECT (-9223372036854775808)::bigint / -1;
ERROR: bigint out of rangeMultiplication in the money type is already guarded and behaves correctly:
SELECT '-92233720368547758.08'::money * -1;
ERROR: money out of rangeI would be happy to provide a patch.
Attachments:
0001-Fix-money-div-INT64_MIN-by-minus-one-overflow.patchtext/x-patch; charset=US-ASCII; name=0001-Fix-money-div-INT64_MIN-by-minus-one-overflow.patchDownload+28-1
On Wed Jul 29, 2026 at 8:40 PM CDT, Andrey Rachitskiy wrote:
Hi, Michael!
Thanks for the report.
Patch attached.
Hi Andrey,
The patch looks good to me. Thanks for the tests! I think you should
send the patch to pgsql-hackers. Sending the patch on -bugs is not the
right process.
--
Tristan Partin
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
AWS (https://aws.amazon.com)
On Thu, 2026-07-30 at 05:04 +0000, Tristan Partin wrote:
I think you should
send the patch to pgsql-hackers. Sending the patch on -bugs is not the
right process.
A patch to -bugs is perfectly fine.
What might help is a commitfest entry as a reminder. The message ID of
a mail to -bugs will work just fine.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 07:10:32AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
A patch to -bugs is perfectly fine.
It is. There is no need to duplicate a discussion for a bug on
pgsql-hackers. We handle patches on both lists all the time. Some
may directly post a patch for a bug on pgsql-hackers rather than
beginning a thread on pgsql-bugs, which is also fine. Discussion
duplicates lead to a confusing result.
What might help is a commitfest entry as a reminder. The message ID of
a mail to -bugs will work just fine.
Exactly. That works just fine. We have plenty of these.
--
Michael