Re: mark the timestamptz variant of date_bin() as stable

From: John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: mark the timestamptz variant of date_bin() as stable
Date: 2021-09-01 17:26:26
Message-ID: CAFBsxsH1OrS+=iKNWBiO4W4mfh6=ug8myrb6XwPXEWSJS8S6WA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 5:32 AM Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> By looking at timestamptz_bin() implementation I don't see why it
> should be STABLE. Its return value depends only on the input values.
> It doesn't look at the session parameters. timestamptz_in() and
> timestamptz_out() are STABLE, that's true, but this is no concern of
> timestamptz_bin().

I'm not quite willing to bet the answer couldn't change if the timezone
changes, but it's possible I'm the one missing something.

--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2021-09-01 17:27:35 Re: Converting contrib SQL functions to new style
Previous Message Andres Freund 2021-09-01 17:00:52 Re: prevent immature WAL streaming