Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jaime Casanova
Subject Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ?
Date
Msg-id c2d9e70e0608132003w609af0f7oa3494c9b918f482e@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: problem with volatile functions in subselects ?
List pgsql-hackers
On 8/13/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "Jaime Casanova" <systemguards@gmail.com> writes:
> >>> There's been some talk about prohibiting flattening if there are any
> >>> volatile functions in the subselect's targetlist, but nothing's been
> >>> done about that.
>
> > BTW, can you think in a good name for a GUC for this?
>
> I'm not in favor of a GUC for this; we should either do it or not.
>

me neither, the idea came because seems there wasn't enough
consensus... my opinion always was we have to return right results and
then think on performance...

if someone cares, this is the patch i use for avoiding pulling up of
subqueries containing volatile functions (at least it has worked for
me :)...

--
regards,
Jaime Casanova

"Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs and the universe trying
to produce bigger and better idiots.
So far, the universe is winning."
                                       Richard Cook

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Forcing current WAL file to be archived
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib