| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Rod Taylor <rod(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable? |
| Date: | 2009-10-14 21:14:31 |
| Message-ID: | 4AD63F37.2090303@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 04:51:03PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Rod Taylor <rod(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>
>>> I tried making a functional index based on an expression
>>> containing the 2 argument regexp_matches() function. Is there a
>>> reason why this function is not marked immutable instead of
>>> normal?
>>>
>> regex_flavor affects its result.
>>
>
> Speaking of which, can we see about deprecating and removing this GUC?
> I've yet to hear of anyone using a flavor other than the default.
>
>
>
You have now. I have a client who sadly uses a non-default setting. And
on 8.4, what is more.
There are more things under heaven and earth ....
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-10-14 21:14:36 | Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable? |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2009-10-14 21:07:34 | Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable? |