Re: Expression indexes and dependecies
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Expression indexes and dependecies |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7513.1374757990@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Expression indexes and dependecies (Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Expression indexes and dependecies
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com> writes: > Ok. I will write up something and submit a patch. Constraints probably also > suffer from the same issue. Whats surprising is we don't mandate that the > functions used in CHECK constraint are immutable (like we do for indexes). > What that means is, even if a row was satisfying a constraint while > insertion, it may not once its there. Is that intentional ? Well, it's probably somewhat historical, but I doubt we'd want to tighten it up now. Here's an example of a sensible CHECK that's only stable: create ... last_update timestamptz check (last_update <= now()) ... More generally, I think the argument was that the behavior of a non-immutable CHECK would at least be easy to understand, assuming you know that the check will only be applied at row insertion or update. Non-immutable indexes could misbehave in much less obvious ways, for instance causing the results of a query to differ depending on whether the planner chose to use that index. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: