From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: default of max_stack_depth |
Date: | 2010-08-06 14:53:06 |
Message-ID: | 19134.1281106386@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> The initial value needs to be small until we have been able to probe
>> rlimit and figure out what is safe.
> Thanks! How about adding the comment about that as follows?
I added this:
/*
* We use the hopefully-safely-small value of 100kB as the compiled-in
* default for max_stack_depth. InitializeGUCOptions will increase it if
* possible, depending on the actual platform-specific stack limit.
*/
although I don't entirely see the point. We are certainly not going to
comment every variable whose compiled-in default gets changed by later
processing.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-08-06 15:02:58 | refactoring comment.c |
Previous Message | Marcelo Mas | 2010-08-06 14:39:28 | BUG #5607: memmory leak in ecpg |