Peter Geoghegan writes:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It's possible that this issue can only manifest on 9.4 and up where
>> we have the ability for tuplesort to allocate work arrays approaching
>> INT_MAX elements. But I don't have a lot of faith in that; I think the
>>
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's possible that this issue can only manifest on 9.4 and up where
> we have the ability for tuplesort to allocate work arrays approaching
> INT_MAX elements. But I don't have a lot of faith in that; I think the
> worst-case stack depth for the
I've been trying to figure out the crash in qsort reported here:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/cal8hzunr2fr1owzhwg-p64gjtnfbbmpx1y2oxmj_xuq3p8y...@mail.gmail.com
I first noticed that our qsort code uses an int to hold some transient
values representing numbers of elements. Since the p
