Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes

From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes
Date: 2007-10-09 08:15:06
Message-ID: 878x6cemb9.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

"Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:

> On 10/9/07, Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> A function is said to be deterministic, if it returns the same value,
>> irrespective of how many times, it is invoked. I think this definition
>> clearly puts the random function under the non-deterministic category. If we
>> have such a classification, do you think we can resolve this issue?
>
> If we frame a set of guidelines/test procedure, do you think it might solve
> the issue? Even, if we don't allow this type of indexing to anything other
> than built-in deterministic functions, i feel it would serve most of the
> indexing requirements.

We already do this. c.f. IMMUTABLE at

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/xfunc-volatility.html

and

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/sql-createindex.html

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2007-10-09 08:31:29 Re: Latest ecpg patch broke MSVC build
Previous Message Michael Meskes 2007-10-09 08:00:51 Re: Latest ecpg patch broke MSVC build

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Csaba Nagy 2007-10-09 08:33:48 Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes
Previous Message Gokulakannan Somasundaram 2007-10-09 07:51:38 Re: Including Snapshot Info with Indexes