I can understand not wanting to change the original repro case query, but, long term, this is a lot of clutter -- the strange data values, the repetition, the "-8, " and the " + 5 > 44", the hard-to-see relationship between the inputs and the output. It all makes it hard to understand exactly what was broken/what was fixed. In the future, put some early work into finding a simplified minimal repro test case that will be easier to understand long term. Leave it to sqlcoverage to confirm that the fix works for the crazy queries.