| From: | Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Feike Steenbergen <feikesteenbergen(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg18: Virtual generated columns are not (yet) safe when superuser selects from them |
| Date: | 2025-06-05 16:03:51 |
| Message-ID: | aEG_5yD8Auc3bppU@msg.df7cb.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Re: Tom Lane
> > Extending the idea, perhaps the check could be moved to run-time and
> > recursively check that only immutable functions are called, including
> > user-defined immutable functions?
>
> I don't think I'd trust that. UDFs can claim to be immutable but
> be lying about it.
That's why I said "recursively". Then truly immutable user-defined
functions could still be used.
But practically, people will probably want to select from other tables
anyway (I've already had to tell a customer that virtual columns do
not allow that), so the use-case for user immutable functions is
probably very thin.
Christoph
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2025-06-05 16:04:01 | Re: postmaster uses more CPU in 18 beta1 with io_method=io_uring |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2025-06-05 15:57:44 | Possibly hard-to-read message |