Gaetano Mendola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The fact that a non-volatile function can not perform
> update is a good improvement but on the other side will
> limit too much if I know what I'm doing.
I've got zero sympathy for this argument. It's been documented right
along that functions with side-effects must be marked volatile. You
don't have a lot of room to complain because 8.0 started to enforce that.
In practice you can circumvent the restriction by splitting the
function in two (ie, there is no check that a nonvolatile function
doesn't call any volatile functions). So if you insist on sticking
with an unsafe application design, you can do it with relatively
localized changes.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
