When computing "0 - INT64_MIN", most platforms would report an
overflow error, which is correct. However, platforms without integer
overflow builtins or 128-bit integers would fail to spot the overflow,
and incorrectly return INT64_MIN.
Back-patch to all supported branches.
Patch be me. Thanks to Jian He for initial investigation, and Laurenz
Albe and Tom Lane for review.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAEZATCUNK-AZSD0jVdgkk0N%3DNcAXBWeAEX-QU9AnJPensikmdQ%40mail.gmail.com
c396aca2b7