Re: Now/current_date and proleakproof - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Now/current_date and proleakproof
Date
Msg-id 3130.1542488509@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Now/current_date and proleakproof  (Rod Taylor <rod.taylor@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Rod Taylor <rod.taylor@gmail.com> writes:
> So it's the timestamp_%_timestamptz operator functions that are missing the
> flag?

I think those are not marked leakproof because they aren't leakproof;
they can throw errors for some inputs, or at least the required
conversions invoke enough code that it's hard to be sure they can't.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Rod Taylor
Date:
Subject: Re: Now/current_date and proleakproof
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: Support custom socket directory in pg_upgrade