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

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: Damage control for planner's get_actual_variable_endpoint() runaway
Date: 2022-11-21 19:15:18
Message-ID: 3258594.1669058118@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> 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.

Yeah, I don't like that either: for one thing, it seems completely
unsafe to back-patch.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-11-21 19:21:35 Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-11-21 19:12:49 Re: pgsql: Prevent instability in contrib/pageinspect's regression test.