| From: | Cédric Villemain <cedric(dot)villemain(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Default of max_stack_depth and getrlimit |
| Date: | 2008-07-21 16:50:38 |
| Message-ID: | 200807211850.43686.cedric.villemain@dalibo.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Le Monday 21 July 2008, Heikki Linnakangas a écrit :
> Cédric Villemain wrote:
> > Le Monday 21 July 2008, Heikki Linnakangas a écrit :
> >> I think we should differentiate between "infinite" and "unknown" in the
> >> return value of get_stack_depth_limit(), and use max_stack_depth of 2MB
> >> in case of infinite, and fall back to the 100kB only in the unknown
> >> case.
> >
> > Why 2MB ? I believed that 3.5MB is the effective good maximum , is that
> > too much ?
>
> 2MB is the value we set max_stack_depth to, unless getrlimit() says that
> the actual stack limit is lower than that.
>
> I believe the 2MB figure is just an arbitrary value, thought to be quite
> safe, but also high enough that most people won't need to raise it.
> Before we started to use getrlimit(), we used to just default
> max_stack_depth=2MB.
Ok, thank you for the explanation.
>
> --
> Heikki Linnakangas
> EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Cédric Villemain
Administrateur de Base de Données
Cel: +33 (0)6 74 15 56 53
http://dalibo.com - http://dalibo.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2008-07-21 18:55:51 | Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v4 |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-07-21 16:14:37 | Re: Default of max_stack_depth and getrlimit |