Re: Stack overflow issue
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Stack overflow issue |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYQvB0fWJcD1DwBXgRnRFtSyRCepCTH4K3Pf7Bg0FJtKg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Stack overflow issue (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Ответы |
Re: Stack overflow issue
Re: Stack overflow issue |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 10:47 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: > What do you think? At least for 0001 and 0002, I think we should just add the stack depth checks. With regard to 0001, CommitTransactionCommand() and friends are hard enough to understand as it is; they need "goto" like I need an extra hole in my head. With regard to 0002, this function isn't sufficiently important to justify adding special-case code for an extremely rare event. We should just handle it the way we do in general. I agree that in the memory-context case it might be worth expending some more code to be more clever. But I probably wouldn't do that for MemoryContextStats(); check_stack_depth() seems fine for that one. In general, I think we should try to keep the number of places that handle stack overflow in "special" ways as small as possible. -- Robert Haas EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: