From: | Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
Cc: | Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes |
Date: | 2007-10-09 11:04:52 |
Message-ID: | 1191927892.16320.50.camel@PCD12478 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> I think you're overly pessimistic here ;-) This classification can be done quite
> efficiently as long as your language is "static enough". The trick is not to
> execute the function, but to scan the code to find all other functions and SQL
> statements a given function may possibly call. If your function calls no SQL
> statements, and only other functions already marked IMMUTABLE, then it must be
> IMMUTABLE itself.
OK, I have a "black-box" mindset right now due to the problem I'm
currently working on, so I didn't even think about checking the source
code of the function (which is the right thing to do if you have the
source code)... in which case you're right, I was overly pessimistic :-)
Cheers,
Csaba.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-10-09 11:09:19 | Re: Uninformative messages from pg_ctl |
Previous Message | Gokulakannan Somasundaram | 2007-10-09 10:38:00 | Re: IndexTuple Structure |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-10-09 11:18:41 | Re: Preliminary patch for tsearch example dictionaries/parsers in contrib |
Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-10-09 10:30:32 | Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes |