"Gregory Stark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oleg pointed out to me here that while we have a command to *set* the toast
> storage characteristics there's no actual supported way to display the current
> settings.
>
> It seems like this would be a reasonable thing to add to \d+
Sorry, sent the
Oleg pointed out to me here that while we have a command to *set* the toast
storage characteristics there's no actual supported way to display the current
settings.
It seems like this would be a reasonable thing to add to \d+
Index: src/bin/psql/describe.c
==
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> Couldn't we just have it pay attention to the existing
>> >> max_stack_depth?
>> >
>> > Recursive query does not consume stack. The server enters an infinite
>> > loop without consuming stack. Stack-depth error does not happen.
>>
>> We could ha
> >> Couldn't we just have it pay attention to the existing
> >> max_stack_depth?
> >
> > Recursive query does not consume stack. The server enters an infinite
> > loop without consuming stack. Stack-depth error does not happen.
>
> We could have a separate guc variable which limits the maximum n
"Yoshiyuki Asaba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> From: David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1
> Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 04:36:30 -0700
>
>> > > I think it's the other way around. The server should not emit
>> > > infinite number of recor
Hi,
From: David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 04:36:30 -0700
> > > I think it's the other way around. The server should not emit
> > > infinite number of records.
> >
> > How about adding new GUC parameter "max_recurs
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Andrew Chernow wrote:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Silently not locking is surely
> > >> not very safe.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Here is the dump code version of the patch. If anyone wants the
> > > return value idea, let me know.
> >
> > So is this a
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 08:51:29PM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> > WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1
> >
> > Here are patches to implement WITH RECURSIVE clause. There are some
> > limitiations and TODO items(see the "Current limitations" section
> > below). Comments are welcome.
> >
> > 1. Credit
> >
