On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 09:53:26PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Torsten Zuehlsdorff > <mailingli...@toco-domains.de> wrote: > > > > On 26.01.2016 07:52, Simon Riggs wrote: > > > >>> Imagine for example a script that in some rare cases passes > >>> happens to pass infinity into generate_series() - in that case > >>> I'd much rather error out than wait till the end of the > >>> universe. > >>> > >>> So +1 from me to checking for infinity. > >>> > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> ERROR infinite result sets are not supported, yet > > > > > > Maybe we should skip the "yet". Or do we really plan to support > > them in (infinite) future? ;) > > > > +1 from me to check infinity also. > > Something like the patch attached would be fine? This wins a > backpatch because the query continuously running eats memory, no?
+1 for back-patching. There's literally no case where an infinite input could be correct as the start or end of an interval for generate_series. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
