| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Functions Immutable but not parallel safe? |
| Date: | 2017-04-05 14:36:39 |
| Message-ID: | 7479.1491402999@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Peter Eisentraut
> <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> - Maybe add a check to opr_sanity to make sure the default set of
>> functions is configured the way we want?
> That seems like a good idea.
+1 for that. We could adopt the strategy already used in opr_sanity of
searching for functions having an unexpected combination of these
attributes. If there are any legitimate exceptions, they could be
embedded in the expected output.
I concur that changing the behavior of CREATE FUNCTION seems a bit too
cute.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2017-04-05 14:40:41 | Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test |
| Previous Message | Arthur Zakirov | 2017-04-05 14:33:52 | Re: [PATCH] Generic type subscripting |