Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [GENERAL] Why extract( ... from timestamp ) is not immutable?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: depesz(at)depesz(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Why extract( ... from timestamp ) is not immutable?
Date: 2012-01-31 03:07:52
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
On 1/30/12 5:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> hubert depesz lubaczewski <depesz(at)depesz(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:35:21AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> We can't have functions which are immutable or not depending on their
>>> inputs.  That way lies madness.
>> but this is exactly what's happening now.
> Well, the current marking is clearly incorrect.  What to do about that
> is a bit less clear --- should we downgrade the marking, or change the
> function's behavior so that it really is immutable?

AFAIK, the only case which is NOT immutable is extract(epoch FROM
timestamp without time zone), no?

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Ashutosh BapatDate: 2012-01-31 03:56:47
Subject: Re: Confusing EXPLAIN output in case of inherited tables
Previous:From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHIDate: 2012-01-31 02:59:31
Subject: Re: Speed dblink using alternate libpq tuple storage

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: NickDate: 2012-01-31 03:55:33
Subject: Help speeding up a left join aggregate
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-01-31 02:49:29
Subject: Re: list blocking queries

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group