From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, James Coleman <jtc331(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Should we document how column DEFAULT expressions work? |
Date: | 2024-07-01 14:26:22 |
Message-ID: | bff385a9-adba-4516-8164-a1239f2f002a@eisentraut.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01.07.24 01:54, David Rowley wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 at 23:57, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
>> Maybe we should really be thinking about deprecating these special
>> values and steering users more urgently toward more robust alternatives.
>>
>> Imagine if 'random' were a valid input value for numeric types.
>
> I think there are valid reasons to use the special timestamp input
> values. One that I can think of is for use with partition pruning. If
> you have a time-range partitioned table and want the planner to prune
> the partitions rather than the executor, you could use
> 'now'::timestamp in your queries to allow the planner to prune.
Yeah, but is that a good user interface? Or is that just something that
happens to work now with the pieces that happened to be there, rather
than a really designed interface?
Hypothetically, what would need to be done to make this work with now()
or current_timestamp or something similar? Do we need a new stability
level that somehow encompasses this behavior, so that the function call
can be evaluated at planning time?
> That
> works providing that you never use that in combination with PREPARE
> and never put the query with the WHERE clause inside a VIEW.
And this kind of thing obviously makes this interface even worse.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stepan Neretin | 2024-07-01 14:31:59 | Re: gamma() and lgamma() functions |
Previous Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2024-07-01 14:22:32 | Re: gamma() and lgamma() functions |