Re: SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2
| От | Christopher Kings-Lynne |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2 |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 06ed01c324be$857b91c0$6500a8c0@fhp.internal обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2 (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: SIGSEGV on cvs tip/7.3.2
|
| Список | 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
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: