Re: generated columns

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com>, Adam Brusselback <adambrusselback(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: generated columns
Date: 2017-10-02 18:36:41
Message-ID: 20171002183641.GE1246@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 02:30:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com> writes:
> > On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 12:50:14PM -0400, Adam Brusselback wrote:
> >> So for me, i'd rather default to compute on read, as long storing the
> >> pre-computed value is an option when necessary.
>
> > Sure, I agree. I was just wondering whether there might be any other
> > difference besides performance characteristics. The answer to that is,
> > I think, "no".
>
> What about non-immutable functions in the generation expression?

Assuming they're permitted, which...well, I could make a case, they
should be mutually exclusive with the cached option.

I guess documenting the behavior in the manual would suffice, tempting
as it would be to include a NOTICE when the table goes from having 0
or more generated columns all of which are immutable to having at
least one that's not.

Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nico Williams 2017-10-02 18:46:42 Re: generated columns
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-10-02 18:30:38 Re: generated columns