Re: IMMUTABLE and PARALLEL SAFE function markings - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: IMMUTABLE and PARALLEL SAFE function markings
Date
Msg-id 20181127003146.5fco656s5xmrt2jv@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: IMMUTABLE and PARALLEL SAFE function markings  (Vik Fearing <vik.fearing@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2018-11-27 01:27:41 +0100, Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 27/11/2018 01:13, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Parallel safe functions should be marked as such.  Immutable functions
> > should be marked as such.  We should not assume that one implies the
> > other, nor should we operate as if they do.
> 
> Yes we should!  Unless you can produce a case where an immutable
> function is not parallel safe.

Well, then write a patch that documents that behaviour, automatically
sets proparallel accordingly, and defines an escape hatch for when the
user actually meant unsafe, not just "unsafe maybe". Just saying "we
should" doesn't go far actually convincing anybody.

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Vik Fearing
Date:
Subject: Re: IMMUTABLE and PARALLEL SAFE function markings
Next
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?