At Fri, 22 Nov 2019 06:15:25 +0100, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote in > čt 21. 11. 2019 v 20:44 odesílatel Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal: > > > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: > > > čt 21. 11. 2019 v 10:31 odesílatel Konstantin Knizhnik < > > > k.knizh...@postgrespro.ru> napsal: > > >> With contain_mutable_functions the patch becomes trivial. > > > > > Stable functions doesn't need own snapshot too, so it is not fully > > correct, > > > but it is on safe side. > > > > No, I doubt that. A stable function is allowed to inspect database state, > > and if it's being called by a volatile function, it has every right to > > expect that it'd see updates-so-far made by the volatile function. > > for this I need new snapshot?
It depends on what we regard as "query" or "command" here. It seems to me that every line in a plpgsql function is regarded as a "query" for stable function, even if the function is called in another "query". In short, we need it, I think. regards. -- Kyotaro Horiguchi NTT Open Source Software Center
