Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1w72Dn-004tYD-26
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org;
	Mon, 30 Mar 2026 02:19:19 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-bugs-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1w72Dk-000U5a-0I
	for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org;
	Mon, 30 Mar 2026 02:19:16 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.96)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1w72Dj-000U5S-2i
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org;
	Mon, 30 Mar 2026 02:19:16 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps  (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384
	(Exim 4.98.2)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1w72Di-00000001jTM-14Z8
	for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org;
	Mon, 30 Mar 2026 02:19:15 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 62U2JBew1897028;
	Sun, 29 Mar 2026 22:19:12 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
cc: kuzmin.db4@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #19438: segfault with temp_file_limit inside cursor
In-reply-to: <CAApHDvqv7g3QODYWbaokXrB9eZrY6JkOVO8cO_TXu_PiU_vyOg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <19438-9d37b179c56d43aa@postgresql.org> <1106026.1774573371@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1338824.1774633289@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAApHDvox3Ro8mZJxignuyB-dGXJ9=wQNEkOFni9025GP=rOKkg@mail.gmail.com> <1830345.1774798374@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAApHDvrdPriH6MO=YGEh9=KVDnDtqZyW4VuRXkmBS8WnRFessA@mail.gmail.com> <1881853.1774828272@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAApHDvpZOCWwSNuBZ4Xg-EcbQ9Bxbk+58AsuE1FCbV5=wyXiqw@mail.gmail.com> <1886754.1774830888@sss.pgh.pa.us> <CAApHDvqv7g3QODYWbaokXrB9eZrY6JkOVO8cO_TXu_PiU_vyOg@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
	message dated "Mon, 30 Mar 2026 14:09:16 +1300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1897026.1774837151.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2026 22:19:11 -0400
Message-ID: <1897027.1774837151@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-bugs.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-bugs-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-bugs>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1897027.1774837151%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> Fair. Maybe worth a short comment in the code to explain why we don't
> use the same elevel then? Just considering someone stumbling upon the
> variation in the future and reporting or asking why, and us having to
> dig up the reason why in the archives to answer them.
> Maybe something like this?

Works for me.  I'm done for the day but will make it so tomorrow.

			regards, tom lane