From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Performance problem in textanycat/anytextcat |
Date: | 2010-05-16 17:11:20 |
Message-ID: | 3628.1274029880@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Couldn't you apply this argument to any built-in immutable function whatsoever?
No, only the ones that are built on top of other functions that aren't
immutable.
I did go looking for other potential problems of the same ilk. The only
one I can find at present is to_timestamp(double), which is an immutable
SQL function but it uses timestamptz + interval, which is marked as not
immutable. I believe the reason for that is that if the interval
includes month or day components then the addition result can depend on
the timezone setting. However, the usage in to_timestamp() involves only
a pure seconds component so the immutable marking should be correct.
Still, we might want to think about reimplementing to_timestamp() as a
pure C function sometime, because the current implementation is many
times slower than it needs to be.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-05-16 17:25:12 | Re: Synchronous replication patch built on SR |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-05-16 17:11:05 | Re: pg_upgrade and extra_float_digits |