Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Laurenz Albe
Subject Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?
Date
Msg-id 22d76c910859d692929b62d44af75de11f96f77e.camel@cybertec.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2018-11-28 at 21:17 -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> I don't agree that we can simply declare that all functional and partial
> indexes have to be rebuilt between every major version upgrade, which is
> the alternative.  There really isn't another option- either we're
> extremely careful and take immutability of functions seriously and make
> sure to preserve behavior, and therefore indexes, across major versions,
> or we don't and we require indexes to be rebuilt.

I absolutely agree with that.

I guess that when I said that we should declare functions IMMUTABLE
even if they might change owing to bug fixes, I didn't make it clear that
each such occurrence would necessitate a fat warning in the release notes
that indexes using them have to be rebuilt.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_config wrongly marked as not parallel safe?
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: New function pg_stat_statements_reset_query() to resetstatistics of a specific query