stack overflow in tzload
guy at alum.mit.edu
Tue Nov 23 01:05:17 UTC 2010
On Nov 22, 2010, at 4:44 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Surely this sort of change should be put in only conditionally.
> On most machines, the change would will slow performance down due to the
> malloc overhead and would add one more point of failure.
> Only on machines with tiny stacks is the change a win.
The original report said "I ran into this problem running a program on openbsd that was using a fairly small thread size." Presumably some piece of code explicitly requested that thread size by setting the stack size before creating the pthread or got the default stack size for the OS by *not* setting the stack size.
I.e., this isn't just a question of a particular machine or even a particular OS; the best we could do at compile time would be to base it on the default pthread stack size on the platform. (If the *default* pthread stack size is big enough, we shouldn't do anything - whoever's requesting the smaller stack size shouldn't do so.)
More information about the tz