Re: optimizing immutable vs. stable function calls?

From: Karl Czajkowski <karlcz(at)isi(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: optimizing immutable vs. stable function calls?
Date: 2017-01-19 02:45:12
Message-ID: 20170119024512.GE23081@moraine.isi.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Jan 18, Tom Lane modulated:
> Karl Czajkowski <karlcz(at)isi(dot)edu> writes:
> > Is there a correctness hazard with pretending our function is
> > IMMUTABLE, even though we will change the underlying config parameter
> > in the same connection?
>
> You could probably get away with that if you never ever use prepared
> queries (beware that almost anything in plpgsql is a prepared query).
> It's a trick that's likely to bite you eventually though.
>

That sounds unnerving. I think I need to play it safe. :-/

Does the plan cache disappear with each connection/backend process?
Or is there also a risk of plans being shared between backends?

Would it be invasive or a small hack to have something like
"transaction-immutable" which can be precomputed during planning, like
immutable, but then must discard those plans at the end of the
transaction...?

karl

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Clailson 2017-01-19 10:08:47 Optimization inner join
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2017-01-19 00:09:20 Re: optimizing immutable vs. stable function calls?