Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 16535.1558712098@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Runtime Partition Pruning
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> What do people think about adding something like this errbacktrace() >> from Álvaro's patch to core PostgreSQL? > I think we did discuss it right after that, or somewhere nearby, and > concluded that the output is so imprecise that it's not really going > to be worth whatever portability issues we'd have to deal with. Hmm, after some digging in the archives, the closest thing I can find is this thread: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAMsr%2BYGL%2ByfWE%3DJvbUbnpWtrRZNey7hJ07%2BzT4bYJdVp4Szdrg%40mail.gmail.com where we discussed using libunwind instead, but people didn't like the extra dependency. However, I stand by the assertion that glibc's backtrace() is too imprecise to be useful; I've experimented with it and despaired of being able to tell where control had actually been. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: