Re: Patch: shouldn't timezone(text, timestamp[tz]) be STABLE? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From John Naylor
Subject Re: Patch: shouldn't timezone(text, timestamp[tz]) be STABLE?
Date
Msg-id CAFBsxsGtW+iNJwOOvKKScYO5WZwsGD=3B35pjULxDbam800ifg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch: shouldn't timezone(text, timestamp[tz]) be STABLE?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Patch: shouldn't timezone(text, timestamp[tz]) be STABLE?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 12:58 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com> writes:
> > Got it. But in this case, what's your opinion on the differences between
> > date_trunc() and timezone()? Shouldn't date_trunc() be always IMMUTABLE as
> > well?
>
> No, because date_trunc depends on the current timezone setting,
> or at least its stable variants do.

A light bulb went off in my head just now, because I modeled date_bin() in part on date_trunc(), but apparently it didn't get the memo that the variant with timezone should have been marked stable.

I believe it's been discussed before that it'd be safer if pg_proc.dat had the same defaults as CREATE FUNCTION, and this is further evidence for that.

--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Bossart, Nathan"
Date:
Subject: Re: Pre-allocating WAL files
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Replication slot drop message is sent after pgstats shutdown.