| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Gajus Kuizinas <gajus(at)gajus(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: IMMUTABLE and PARALLEL SAFE function markings |
| Date: | 2018-11-27 00:31:46 |
| Message-ID: | 20181127003146.5fco656s5xmrt2jv@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2018-11-27 01:27:41 +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 27/11/2018 01:13, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Parallel safe functions should be marked as such. Immutable functions
> > should be marked as such. We should not assume that one implies the
> > other, nor should we operate as if they do.
>
> Yes we should! Unless you can produce a case where an immutable
> function is not parallel safe.
Well, then write a patch that documents that behaviour, automatically
sets proparallel accordingly, and defines an escape hatch for when the
user actually meant unsafe, not just "unsafe maybe". Just saying "we
should" doesn't go far actually convincing anybody.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2018-11-27 00:34:03 | Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe? |
| Previous Message | Vik Fearing | 2018-11-27 00:27:41 | Re: IMMUTABLE and PARALLEL SAFE function markings |