Moshe Jacobson <mo...@neadwerx.com> writes:
> The function pulls a GUC value and that's all it does. Is it safe to mark
> it IMMUTABLE?
No; such a function is by definition mutable.
> I noticed that if I updated the GUC variable and ran the
> query again, it worked as I would hope, with the new value of the function
> substituted. So it seems it would be safe, but I'd like to verify.
You might chance to get away with that as long as you never ever use the
function in a view or prepared query (including inside a plpgsql
function). But it seems likely to bite you eventually.
> I'd also like to know why it wouldn't work if the function was STABLE:
> Since Postgres should know that it's not going to change over the course of
> the query, couldn't it substitute the value as well?
You have not shown us the context, but I suspect you are wishing that the
planner would assume that the function's result can't change between
planning and execution. Unfortunately, it can.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
