On 7/23/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> No, the place that has to change is where errstart() detects that we're
> recursing. We could possibly have it first try to make a shorter string
> and only give up entirely if recursion happens again, but given that
> this is such a corner case I don't think it's worth the complexity and
> risk of further bugs. I've made it just drop the statement at the same
> time that it decides to give up on printing other context (which can
> also be a source of out-of-memory problems btw).
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-07/msg00215.php
>
Makes sense.
regards,
--
Sibte Abbas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com