On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> This is an
> issue that other people have run into in the past, and I don't think
> we have a good solution. I wonder if we should put some kind of a
> limit in place so that queries like this will at least fail relatively
> gracefully with an error message rather than taking down the box.
Eh? That's exactly what's supposed to happen now. When malloc returns
0 you're supposed to get a graceful error message and transaction
abort.
--
greg