Handle dates that underflow differently

[JelteF]

Description

DuckDB dates can be further into the past than Postgres dates. We should either truncate the date to the lowest possible date that's representable in Postgres, or we should throw an error. Underflowing and returning a date in the future is the worst possible behavior.

This is a query that creates these underflowing dates:

SELECT * FROM duckdb.query($$
    select
        '5877642-06-25 (BC)'::date as date,
        '290309-12-22 (BC) 00:00:00'::timestamp as timestamp,
        '290309-12-22 (BC) 00:00:00'::timestamp_s as timestamp_s,
        '290309-12-22 (BC) 00:00:00'::timestamp_ms as timestamp_ms,
        '290309-12-22 (BC) 00:17:30+00:17'::timestamptz as timestamptz,
$$);
     date      │          timestamp           │         timestamp_s          │         timestamp_ms         │           timestamptz
───────────────┼──────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────┼─────────────────────────────────
 5881580-07-14 │ 294247-01-10 08:01:49.551616 │ 294247-01-10 08:01:49.551616 │ 294247-01-10 08:01:49.551616 │ 294247-01-10 09:02:19.551616+01
(1 row)

Example of underflowing dates are in this test:

pg_duckdb/test/regression/expected/test_all_types.out

Lines 42 to 47 in 02ebeae

	date | 07-14-5881580
	timestamp | Sun Jan 10 08:01:49.551616 294247
	timestamp_s | Sun Jan 10 08:01:49.551616 294247
	timestamp_ms | Sun Jan 10 08:01:49.551616 294247
	timestamp_ns | Wed Sep 22 00:00:00 1677
	timestamp_tz | Sun Jan 10 00:01:49.551616 294247 PST

Found by #577

[kamuli4]

Hi, I've created a pull request with my attempt to fix this issue. I closed #611 because it was accidentally opened as a draft