| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Eric B(dot) Ridge" <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: REWRITE_INVOKE_MAX and "query may contain cycles" |
| Date: | 2003-02-21 00:11:19 |
| Message-ID: | 1438.1045786279@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Eric B. Ridge" <ebr(at)tcdi(dot)com> writes:
> That's better. I've set mine (in 7.2.3) to 1024. I'm at 50ish
> operations right now and that number has the potential to grow, perhaps
> even past 100. That's why I was asking if it could become a
> configuration setting.
Hm, I had figured "100 is plenty". But maybe not.
> Is making it configurable technically possible (ie, can rewriteHandler
> access GUC parameters?), and if I invested the time to make it happen,
> would a patch be accepted?
Yes, and yes IMHO. Even better would be to detect loops directly and
eliminate this kluge entirely, but I'm not sure if you want to get into
that ... whereas a GUC parameter is pretty trivial. Don't forget the
documentation updates (which you will find is a bigger patch than the
actual code change).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Eric B.Ridge | 2003-02-21 00:49:44 | Re: Fwd: REWRITE_INVOKE_MAX and "query may contain cycles" |
| Previous Message | Eric B.Ridge | 2003-02-20 23:55:18 | Re: Fwd: REWRITE_INVOKE_MAX and "query may contain cycles" |