Am Montag, den 14.11.2005, 15:06 -0500 schrieb Tom Lane:
> Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Now this is really a bug:
>
> That's in the eye of the beholder (and one who wasn't paying attention
> to previous discussion of this point, evidently).
Yes I was, but only to the fact it is not useable for
caching and there are some cases (like random)
for which STABLE would be bad thing [tm].
> The reason why the no-data-change rule is now enforced, not only
> recommended, is that a stable/immutable function now actually would
> not see any changes it did make. Consider code like
>
> INSERT INTO foo VALUES (42, ...);
> SELECT * INTO rec FROM foo WHERE key = 42;
> IF NOT FOUND THEN
> RAISE EXCEPTION 'where did my row go?';
>
> If this were allowed in stable/immutable functions, the RAISE would
> in fact be reached in 8.1, because the SELECT will be done with the
> snapshot of the query that called the function. This is a feature,
Ah this was the missing bit. I though this would only be true
for IMMUTABLE.
Thanks for the explanation. I'm not fine w/ it.
Regards
Tino
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
