From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
Cc: | "D(dot) Duccini" <duccini(at)backpack(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, Pgsql-novice <pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [SQL] date_trunc'd timestamp index possible? |
Date: | 2004-10-01 18:49:34 |
Message-ID: | 13492.1096656574@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-novice pgsql-sql |
Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> writes:
> I am not sure how to check if the supplied function for converting
> a timestamp with time zone to a timestamp without timezone using a
> specified time zone is immutable. I think this function should be
> immutable, but that it probably isn't.
Yup. In 7.4:
regression=# select provolatile from pg_proc where oid = 'timezone(text,timestamptz)'::regprocedure;
provolatile
-------------
s
(1 row)
regression=#
This is a thinko that's already been corrected for 8.0:
regression=# select provolatile from pg_proc where oid = 'timezone(text,timestamptz)'::regprocedure;
provolatile
-------------
i
(1 row)
regression=#
If you wanted you could just UPDATE pg_proc to correct this mistake.
Another possibility is to create a function that's an IMMUTABLE
wrapper around the standard function.
Looking at this, I realize that date_trunc() is mismarked: the
timestamptz variant is strongly dependent on the timezone setting
and so should be STABLE not IMMUTABLE. Ooops.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Darcy Buskermolen | 2004-10-01 18:52:58 | Re: AIX and V8 beta 3 |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2004-10-01 18:47:46 | Handling of mutable functions in subqueries? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-01 18:52:46 | Re: max_connections not changing |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-10-01 18:44:37 | Re: date_trunc'd timestamp index possible? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-01 21:17:28 | Re: date_trunc'd timestamp index possible? |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-10-01 18:44:37 | Re: date_trunc'd timestamp index possible? |