OK, now that _a_ bison exists that works, how does this effect our
release? I don't see preproc.[ch] in CVS. Do we need this new bison
version on postgresql.org because Marc generates these as part of his
install script?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 11:10:01AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> BTW, I spent some time looking at the problem, and it seems the issue
> >> is not overrun of any bison internal table, but failure to compress the
> >> resulting "action table" into 32K entries. This means that the required
>
> > Ouch! This of course is not so much a problem for ecpg but for the
> > backend should we run into the problem there too.
>
> As of CVS tip a few days ago, the backend's action table was about 27K
> entries. So we have some breathing room, but certainly in the
> foreseeable future there will be a problem...
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
