| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, mail(at)joeconway(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe? |
| Date: | 2018-11-29 05:40:52 |
| Message-ID: | 22d76c910859d692929b62d44af75de11f96f77e.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 21:17 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I don't agree that we can simply declare that all functional and partial
> indexes have to be rebuilt between every major version upgrade, which is
> the alternative. There really isn't another option- either we're
> extremely careful and take immutability of functions seriously and make
> sure to preserve behavior, and therefore indexes, across major versions,
> or we don't and we require indexes to be rebuilt.
I absolutely agree with that.
I guess that when I said that we should declare functions IMMUTABLE
even if they might change owing to bug fixes, I didn't make it clear that
each such occurrence would necessitate a fat warning in the release notes
that indexes using them have to be rebuilt.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-11-29 05:56:08 | Re: New function pg_stat_statements_reset_query() to reset statistics of a specific query |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2018-11-29 05:00:47 | Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe? |