Re: SPI_ERROR_CONNECT

From: Willem Buitendyk <willem(at)pcfish(dot)ca>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SPI_ERROR_CONNECT
Date: 2008-02-12 06:58:49
Message-ID: 47B143A9.6010300@pcfish.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Tom Lane wrote:

>That's a fairly bad workaround (assuming that the function is a
> legitimate candidate to be IMMUTABLE) because it defeats potential
> optimizations.
>
> What I'd suggest you do instead is rethink your apparently widespread
> habit of whacking your view definitions around on-the-fly. This would
> never have worked at all before PG 8.3 (and as you can see we still have
> some bugs left in supporting it in 8.3 :-(). Even when it does work,
> there is a whole lot of frantic paddling going on just under the
> surface. We may sail serenely on like the swan, but not very speedily

Yep, already started reorganizing so that I don't have to hack away at
the views so much. So far I've been
able to do without the functions that would only work with volatile.

cheers,

willem

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ken Johanson 2008-02-12 07:49:26 Re: SELECT CAST(123 AS char) -> 1
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-02-12 06:43:45 Re: SPI_ERROR_CONNECT