On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> ... and that would be a seriously bad API.  There are not SUSET
> restrictions on other resources such as work_mem.  Why do we need
> one for this?

I think a better analogy would be imposing a maximum number of rows a
query can output. That might be a sane thing to have for some
circumstances but it's not useful in general.

Consider for instance my favourite recursive query application,
displaying the lock dependency graph for pg_locks. What arbitrary
maximum number of locks would you like to impose at which the query
should error out?

There is a situation though that I think is motivating this though
where it would be nice to detect a problem: when the query is such
that it *can't* produce a record because there's an infinite loop
before the first record. Ideally you want some way to detect that
you've recursed and haven't changed anything that could lead to a
change in the recursion condition. But that seems like a pretty hard
thing to detect, probably impossible.


Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to