Re: Interesting case of IMMUTABLE significantly hurting performance

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com>, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Olleg Samoylov <splarv(at)ya(dot)ru>, "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Interesting case of IMMUTABLE significantly hurting performance
Date: 2025-04-11 23:31:35
Message-ID: CAHyXU0wox32G2SteVou7VrBz1CHbDEcsGaTzgpLoyxGFHrN3YQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 10:51 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > I guess the real problems here are lack of feedback on a number of
> fronts:
> > *) the server knows the function is not immutable but lets you create it
> > anyway, even though it can have negative downstream consequences
>
> That's debatable I think. If you know what you're doing, you're going
> to be annoyed by warnings telling you that you don't.
>
> > *) there is no way to discern inline vs non-inlined execution in explain
>
> That's simply false. Using the examples in this thread:
>

ah -- gotcha. misread the original email -- should have known better :)
thanks

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Igor Korot 2025-04-12 01:48:55 Clarification on the docs
Previous Message Adrian Klaver 2025-04-11 15:01:04 Re: To take backup of Postgresql Database without large objects