Re: can we mark upper/lower/textlike functions leakproof?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: can we mark upper/lower/textlike functions leakproof?
Date: 2024-08-02 01:02:46
Message-ID: CA+TgmobL10X-HWMpvGY4kRff8FzAdNvjDU0aJeWQE-RQTLr-=g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 4:45 PM Jacob Champion
<jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Would it provide enough value for effort to explicitly mark leaky
> procedures as such? Maybe that could shrink the grey area enough to be
> protective?

You mean like proleakproof = true/false/maybe?

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2024-08-02 01:27:53 Re: PG buildfarm member cisticola
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2024-08-01 23:57:18 Re: Refactoring postmaster's code to cleanup after child exit