On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 01:19:10PM -0700, Chris Anderson wrote: > It looks like this reduce would eventually > overwhelm the interpreter, as your set of hash keys looks like it may > grow without bounds as it encounters more data.
As you can probably see, it's counting IP address prefixes, and it's bounded. Even encountering all possible IPv4 prefixes (/0 to /32) and IPv6 (/0 to /128), there will be never be any more than 162 keys in the hash. > Perhaps I'm wrong. 200 bytes is a bit small, but I'd be worried that > with 4kb users wouldn't get a warning until they had moved a "bad" > reduce to production data. It's not so much a warning as a hard error :-) > If your reduce is ok even on giant data sets, maybe you can experiment > with the minimum value in share/server/views.js line 52 that will > allow you to proceed. In my case, I'm happy to turn off the checking entirely. I was just following the request in default.ini: ; If you think you're hitting reduce_limit with a "good" reduce function, ; please let us know on the mailing list so we can fine tune the heuristic. Regards, Brian.
