On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Olleg Samoylov <splarv@ya.ru> writes: > Looked like random() is "volatile", but in subselect it works like "stable".
The point here is that that's an uncorrelated subselect --- ie, it contains no outer references --- so it need not be, and is not, re-evaluated at every outer row.
That seems rather circular. Why shouldn't a volatile be honored as volatile just because it is in an uncorrelated sub-select?
