Re: Subqueries in Check() -- Still Intentionally Omitted? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Subqueries in Check() -- Still Intentionally Omitted?
Date
Msg-id 8018.1220397751@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Subqueries in Check() -- Still Intentionally Omitted?  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Responses Re: Subqueries in Check() -- Still Intentionally Omitted?
List pgsql-general
Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes:
> My question is not why don't we allow subqueries in CHECK, my question
> is why do we allow stable/volatile functions?

Historically we've allowed it, and it's not clear what we'd buy by
changing that, other than breaking existing applications whose authors
forgot to mark their functions immutable.  If there were something we
could usefully do by checking the mutability status of the condition,
then it would be worth breaking compatibility here...

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Index non-usage problem in 8.2.9
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Subqueries in Check() -- Still Intentionally Omitted?