Re: Damage control for planner's get_actual_variable_endpoint() runaway

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Damage control for planner's get_actual_variable_endpoint() runaway
Date: 2022-11-21 19:09:52
Message-ID: 210D877F-9C93-4AAA-B333-1A63D96F45E4@anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On November 21, 2022 10:44:17 AM PST, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>Robert, something like this perhaps? limit on both the index and the heap.

I don't think we should add additional code / struct members into very common good paths for these limits.

I don't really understand the point of limiting in the index - where would the large number of pages accessed come from?

Andres
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-11-21 19:12:49 Re: pgsql: Prevent instability in contrib/pageinspect's regression test.
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2022-11-21 19:05:04 Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15