On 06.11.2010 00:39, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
On 11/05/2010 05:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Anyway, what this points up is that we are making a very conservative
assumption about what to do when getrlimit() returns RLIM_INFINITY.
It does not seem real reasonable to interpret that as 10
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> On 11/05/2010 05:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Anyway, what this points up is that we are making a very conservative
>> assumption about what to do when getrlimit() returns RLIM_INFINITY.
>> It does not seem real reasonable to interpret that as 100kB on any
>> modern platform.
On 11/05/2010 05:45 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Anyway, what this points up is that we are making a very conservative
assumption about what to do when getrlimit() returns RLIM_INFINITY.
It does not seem real reasonable to interpret that as 100kB on any
modern platform. I'm inclined to interpret it a
I wondered why some of the buildfarm machines were showing
max_stack_depth = 100kB, and Andrew Dunstan kindly lent me the
use of "dungbeetle" to check it out. What I found out:
1. max_stack_depth has the expected value (equal to ulimit -s)
in any manually started postmaster. It only drops to 100
