Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 1:26 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> It looks like amcostestimate could change the path's disabled_nodes
>> count, since that's set up before invoking amcostestimate. I guess
>> it could be set to INT_MAX to have a comparable solution to before.
> It's probably better to add a more modest value, to avoid overflow.
> You could add a million or so and be far away from overflow while
> presumably still being more disabled than any other path.
But that'd only matter if the path survived its first add_path
tournament, which it shouldn't. If it does then you're at risk
of the same run-time failure reported here.
(Having said that, you're likely right that "a million or so"
would be a safer choice, since it doesn't require the assumption
that the path fails instantly.)
regards, tom lane
