From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Constraint exclusion can't process simple constant expressions? |
Date: | 2011-04-21 07:30:36 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTimvHBwg88a-WDxhz-=Ts6Ry6wNApQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:05 AM, Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> "IMMUTABLE indicates that the function cannot modify the database and
> always returns the same result when given the same argument values"
>
> Emphasis on "always". If the result of the function, given the same
> argument values, can be different after a SET, then it doesn't qualify
> for immutability. At least, that's my understanding.
That's a ridiculous use of the word "Immutable"
In any CS class, the timezone would be an implicit input to the
function. So it would be immutable in *that* sense (it also takes
timezone into consideration).
Perhaps the optimizer should take contextual information that cannot
change inside a query as input too.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Claudio Freire | 2011-04-21 07:34:47 | Re: Constraint exclusion can't process simple constant expressions? |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-04-21 06:01:54 | Re: %100 CPU on Windows Server 2003 |