Re: can we mark upper/lower/textlike functions leakproof? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Joe Conway
Subject Re: can we mark upper/lower/textlike functions leakproof?
Date
Msg-id efb1b9f6-99d6-43f4-8ef1-f9b046db2f80@joeconway.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: can we mark upper/lower/textlike functions leakproof?  (Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: can we mark upper/lower/textlike functions leakproof?
Re: can we mark upper/lower/textlike functions leakproof?
List pgsql-hackers
On 8/2/24 09:48, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 6:03 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 4:45 PM Jacob Champion
>> <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> > Would it provide enough value for effort to explicitly mark leaky
>> > procedures as such? Maybe that could shrink the grey area enough to be
>> > protective?
>>
>> You mean like proleakproof = true/false/maybe?
> 
> Yeah, exactly.

<dons flameproof suit>
Hmmm, and then have "leakproof_mode" = strict/lax/off where 'strict' is 
current behavior, 'lax' allows the 'maybe's to get pushed down, and 
'off' ignores the leakproof attribute entirely and pushes down anything 
that merits being pushed?
</dons flameproof suit>

-- 
Joe Conway
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Remove obsolete RECHECK keyword completely
Next
From: "David E. Wheeler"
Date:
Subject: Re: Why is citext/regress failing on hamerkop?