| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Joseph S" <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Static functions |
| Date: | 2008-10-04 12:36:59 |
| Message-ID: | 873ajcr0yc.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> "Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> > Shouldn't PG make all efforts to not execute something when the result is
>> > already known?
>>
>> Not if said effort would cost more than is saved, which would be by far
>> the most likely result if we tried to cache all function results.
>>
>
> Sorry Tom, I confused STABLE with IMMUTABLE; my bad.
No, this is equally untrue for immutable.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's On-Demand Production Tuning
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2008-10-04 14:14:30 | Re: Static functions |
| Previous Message | Jörn Heid | 2008-10-04 09:31:34 | Re: Standalone Windows Installation |