Re: SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Christopher Kings-Lynne
Subject Re: SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2
Date
Msg-id 06ed01c324be$857b91c0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal
Whole thread Raw
In response to SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Responses Re: SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
> There's been some past speculation about putting in a function call
> nesting depth limit, but I haven't been able to think of any reasonable
> way to estimate a safe limit.  The stack size limit varies a lot across
> different platforms, and the amount of stack space consumed per PL
> function call level seems hard to estimate too.  We do have a nesting
> depth limit for expressions, which is intended specifically to avoid
> stack overflow during expression eval --- but the amount of stack chewed
> per expression level is relatively small and predictable.

GUC variable?  Hmm...but that would mean that a normal user could still just
crash the machine...?

Chris



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Sequence usage patch
Next
From: Larry Rosenman
Date:
Subject: Re: RBLs ... I'm tired of spam ...