| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Yoshiyuki Asaba <y-asaba(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, david(at)fetter(dot)org, zb(at)cybertec(dot)at, ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1 |
| Date: | 2008-05-21 16:48:50 |
| Message-ID: | 1211388530.25082.21.camel@jd-laptop |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> >> Couldn't we just have it pay attention to the existing
> >> max_stack_depth?
> >
> > Recursive query does not consume stack. The server enters an infinite
> > loop without consuming stack. Stack-depth error does not happen.
>
> We could have a separate guc variable which limits the maximum number of
> levels of recursive iterations. That might be a useful feature for DBAs that
> want to limit their users from issuing an infinite query.
>
statement_timeout :)
Joshua D. Drake
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-05-21 17:04:34 | Re: [HACKERS] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1 |
| Previous Message | Albert Cervera Areny | 2008-05-21 16:22:42 | Re: Posible planner improvement? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-05-21 17:04:34 | Re: [HACKERS] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1 |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-05-21 15:23:34 | Re: [HACKERS] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1 |