| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, James Keener <jim(at)jimkeener(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #18097: Immutable expression not allowed in generated at |
| Date: | 2023-11-14 17:48:54 |
| Message-ID: | 2502479.1699984134@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> writes:
>> There are a couple of points worth bikeshedding perhaps. I didn't
>> spend much thought on the wrapper functions' names, but it's surely
>> true that the semantic difference between contain_mutable_functions
>> and ContainMutableFunctions is quite un-apparent from those names.
>> Anybody got a better idea?
> Oh no! We encountered one of the most difficult problems in computer
> science [1].
Indeed :-(. Looking at it again this morning, I'm thinking of
using "contain_mutable_functions_after_planning" --- what do you
think of that?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2023-11-15 01:41:06 | RE: Logical replication is missing block of rows when sending initial sync? |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2023-11-14 15:52:36 | Re: BUG #18195: PL/pgSQL: invalid syntax allowed in SELECT INTO statement |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2023-11-14 17:59:17 | Re: retire MemoryContextResetAndDeleteChildren backwards compatibility macro |
| Previous Message | Erik Wienhold | 2023-11-14 17:40:31 | Re: Issue with launching PGAdmin 4 on Mac OC |