From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Boolean error |
Date: | 2004-11-29 06:18:05 |
Message-ID: | 874qj9uqjm.fsf@stark.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> There was some talk awhile ago of preventing flattening when the
> subquery targetlist contains volatile functions, but we didn't
> have any consensus that the cure would be better than the disease.
> (In particular, since user-defined functions default to being
> considered volatile, such a restriction could easily cripple
> optimization of subqueries.)
Thinking aloud... Postgres could have a VOLATILE function attribute to
explicitly mark functions requiring special care.
The default could be sort of a best-guess
usually-volatile-but-sometimes-takes-liberties-when-convenient compromise.
Perhaps eventually warning on functions created without being explicitly
VOLATILE/STABLE/IMMUTABLE.
Well, I guess Postgres can't warn on a valid SQL function if it's interested
in spec conformance. But it could be an option to do so.
--
greg
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Fuhr | 2004-11-29 06:43:28 | Re: How many views... |
Previous Message | Shachar Shemesh | 2004-11-29 04:41:09 | Re: sequencing two tables |