Re: Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: 5bih4k+4jfl6m39j23k(at)guerrillamail(dot)com
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Parallel safety of CURRENT_* family
Date: 2016-12-01 19:18:00
Message-ID: 8557.1480619880@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

<5bih4k+4jfl6m39j23k(at)guerrillamail(dot)com> writes:
> How should I mark a function which calls CURRENT_DATE? Parallel safe or parallel restricted?

> pg_proc shows that now() is marked as restricted, but transaction_timestamp() is marked as safe.

That's certainly silly, because they're equivalent. I should think
they're both safe. Robert?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-12-01 19:22:19 Re: Broken SSL tests in master
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-12-01 19:13:44 Re: pgbench - allow backslash continuations in \set expressions