| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Hans Spaans <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)hansspaans(dot)nl>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: concat_ws |
| Date: | 2003-08-03 22:24:52 |
| Message-ID: | 1680.1059949492@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> It seems to be running out of memory.
> Also worth noting, without STRICT, even a plain EXPLAIN *without*
> ANALYZE causes the problem to show itself.
Yeah. The problem is that the SQL function inliner generates an
enormous expression tree from this function definition. 7.3 had no
inliner so no problem.
I am not sure what to do about it --- the only idea that comes to mind
is to put an arbitrary limit (of, say, 5 or 10 function calls) on the
depth of inlining expansion. That seems like a pretty ugly answer
... anyone have a better one?
Your definition of concat_ws bears some passing resemblance to the
infamous Ackermann's function, btw.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-03 23:13:02 | Re: concat_ws |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2003-08-03 21:56:15 | Re: concat_ws |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-08-03 22:37:38 | Re: SQL2003 GENERATED ... AS ... syntax |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2003-08-03 21:56:15 | Re: concat_ws |