Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: SSI bug?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>, YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt(at)mwd(dot)biglobe(dot)ne(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SSI bug?
Date: 2011-03-25 19:18:41
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:57 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>> I'm still looking at whether it's sane to try to issue a warning
>> when an HTAB exceeds the number of entries declared as its
>> max_size when it was created.
> I think this does it.
> If nothing else, it might be instructive to use it while testing the
> SSI patch.  Would it make any sense to slip this into 9.1, or should
> I add it to the first 9.2 CF?

I don't think it's too late to commit something like this, but I'm not
clear on whether we want it.  Is this checking for what should be a
can't-happen case, or are these soft limits that we expect to be
exceeded from time to time?

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-03-25 19:23:14
Subject: Re: SSI bug?
Previous:From: Vaibhav KaushalDate: 2011-03-25 19:12:21
Subject: Re: When and how many times does ExecSetParamPlan executes?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group