Re: Division by zero

2009/8/2 Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk>:
> On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 05:22:45PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> 2009/8/2 Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk>:
>> > On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 02:20:18PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> >> There is paradox - IMMUTABLE function break inlinig :(. There is maybe bug
>> >
>> > Not in any tests I've done.
>>
>> I did it - and in this case immutable is wrong and strict not.
>
> I'm not sure what you're responding to here, but I'm pretty sure the OP
> wants IMMUTABLE and does not want STRICT/RETURNS NULL ON NULL INPUT.
>

I checked if function was inlined or not. When I mark function as
strict then it was inlined. When I mark function as IMMUTABLE then it
wasn't inlined. That's all - you can check it too.

>> It's an
>> new for me, because I used rules that are well only for plpgsql or C
>> language. What I see now, the rules for sql are totally different.
>
> SQL language functions are going to be different from anything else
> because the can be.  The planner has intimate knowledge of SQL and hence
> will try hard to expand these out and optimize them (in a similar way to
> how it handles views).
>
> The semantics of these keywords shouldn't change between SQL, plpgsql
> and C functions though, it's just that the optimizer can look inside an
> SQL function and not other functions.
>
> Maybe if you can say what you did and what result you got back?
>
> --
>  Sam  http://samason.me.uk/
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>