Re: [HACKERS] segfault in HEAD when too many nested functions call - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] segfault in HEAD when too many nested functions call
Date
Msg-id 13694.1500134244@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] segfault in HEAD when too many nested functions call  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> I still think that we really need to add a check in ExecProcNode().

Actually ... to what extent could a check in ExecInitNode() substitute
for that?  Or do we need both?  How about ExecEndNode() and ExecReScan()?

You could argue that the latter two tree traversals are unlikely either to
consume more stack than ExecInitNode() or to be called from a more deeply
nested point.  So maybe they're okay.  But I'm not sure I believe that
initialization stack needs always exceed execution stack needs, though
sometimes they might.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] segfault in HEAD when too many nested functions call
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] New partitioning - some feedback