| From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser |
| Date: | 2024-03-25 23:12:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAOYmi+kQ1kB16_ocQxCQrzHuKK=dyVPcM7+wAUgpys5EUnWpjw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 4:02 PM Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> Well, what's the alternative? The current parser doesn't check stack depth in frontend code. Presumably it too will eventually just run out of memory, possibly rather sooner as the stack frames could be more expensive than the incremental parser stack extensions.
Stack size should be pretty limited, at least on the platforms I'm
familiar with. So yeah, the recursive descent will segfault pretty
quickly, but it won't repalloc() an unbounded amount of heap space.
The alternative would just be to go back to a hardcoded limit in the
short term, I think.
--Jacob
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2024-03-25 23:14:18 | Re: session username in default psql prompt? |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2024-03-25 23:02:10 | Re: WIP Incremental JSON Parser |