Re: mark the timestamptz variant of date_bin() as stable

From: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: mark the timestamptz variant of date_bin() as stable
Date: 2021-09-01 09:32:40
Message-ID: CAJ7c6TPqVtNVB+dk=uRMrHx+t-e+JRprdBfpd6s2TeLw+QWTew@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi John,

By looking at timestamptz_bin() implementation I don't see why it
should be STABLE. Its return value depends only on the input values.
It doesn't look at the session parameters. timestamptz_in() and
timestamptz_out() are STABLE, that's true, but this is no concern of
timestamptz_bin().

Am I missing something?

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Yugo NAGATA 2021-09-01 09:33:44 Re: Fix around conn_duration in pgbench
Previous Message houzj.fnst@fujitsu.com 2021-09-01 09:23:48 RE: Parallel Inserts (WAS: [bug?] Missed parallel safety checks..)