Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ?
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200609022057.k82KvRa02352@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards@gmail.com> writes: > >>> There's been some talk about prohibiting flattening if there are any > >>> volatile functions in the subselect's targetlist, but nothing's been > >>> done about that. > > > BTW, can you think in a good name for a GUC for this? > > I'm not in favor of a GUC for this; we should either do it or not. > > If we do it, basically the response to anyone who complains about loss > of performance should be "fix your function to be marked stable or > immutable, as appropriate". Agreed. Are we doing this, or is it a TODO? -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: