| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christoph Berg <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Joe Van Dyk <joe(at)tanga(dot)com>, "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [BUGS] ltree::text not immutable? |
| Date: | 2014-11-17 16:24:41 |
| Message-ID: | 6903.1416241481@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Christoph Berg <cb(at)df7cb(dot)de> writes:
> In HEAD, there's this WARNING now:
> WARNING: type input function chkpass_in should not be volatile
Yeah, that's intentional.
> IMHO built-in functions (even if only in contrib) shouldn't be raising
> warnings - the user can't do anything about the warnings anyway, so
> they shouldn't get notified in the first place.
The point is to find out how many people care ...
> (Catched by Debian's postgresql-common testsuite)
... and by "people", I do not mean test suites.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christoph Berg | 2014-11-17 16:38:38 | Re: [HACKERS] ltree::text not immutable? |
| Previous Message | Christoph Berg | 2014-11-17 16:21:17 | Re: [HACKERS] ltree::text not immutable? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Steve Singer | 2014-11-17 16:25:40 | Re: logical decoding - reading a user catalog table |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2014-11-17 16:24:17 | Re: using custom scan nodes to prototype parallel sequential scan |