| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why overhead of SPI is so large? |
| Date: | 2019-08-27 13:46:24 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZHLABbMi7R9xXvvoetsPaRmMrr9mb2NgJH6zc0ubGTtw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 12:01 PM David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> No, it's lying to the RDBMS, so it's pilot error. The problem of
> determining from the function itself whether it is in fact immutable
> is, in general, equivalent to the Halting Problem, so no, we can't
> figure it out. We do need to trust our users not to lie to us, and we
> do not need to protect them from the consequences when they do.
Depends. I don't mind if mislabeling a function leads to "wrong"
query results, but I don't think it's OK for it to, say, crash the
server.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2019-08-27 13:47:25 | Re: "ago" times on buildfarm status page |
| Previous Message | Asim R P | 2019-08-27 13:35:50 | Re: Cleanup isolation specs from unused steps |