| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Segfault from PL/Perl Returning vstring |
| Date: | 2009-12-21 20:58:35 |
| Message-ID: | 4B2FE17B.3000708@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On mån, 2009-12-21 at 14:46 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> BTW, this should arguably not be an immutable function. You could
>> replace the perl library, so it's not solely dependent on the input
>> for
>> the result.
>>
>
> By this logic, no function could be immutable, because you could replace
> the C library or parts of the kernel.
>
>
*shrug* Maybe, OTOH upgrading perl is not such an unusual operation, and
doing so *will* affect this value. It's a bit hard to see why one would
want the perl version to be immutable. It doesn't look like it would be
much use in an index ....
I think people are generally safer not marking functions immutable
unless they actually need them to be.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tim Bunce | 2009-12-21 21:19:12 | Update ppport.h in plperl |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-12-21 20:39:39 | Re: Segfault from PL/Perl Returning vstring |