Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-05 Thread Chris Browne
mmonc...@gmail.com (Merlin Moncure) writes: > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Chris Browne wrote: >> mmonc...@gmail.com (Merlin Moncure) writes: >>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > *) also, isn't it possible to

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-05 Thread Robert Haas
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Chris Browne wrote: > mmonc...@gmail.com (Merlin Moncure) writes: >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: *) also, isn't it possible to change text cast influencing GUCs 'n' times p

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-05 Thread Tom Lane
Chris Browne writes: > mmonc...@gmail.com (Merlin Moncure) writes: >> yeah -- perhaps you shouldn't be allowed set things like datestyle in >> functions then. > That would cause grief for Slony-I, methinks, and probably other things > that behave somewhat similar. Yeah, it's not really practical

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-05 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:59 PM, Chris Browne wrote: > mmonc...@gmail.com (Merlin Moncure) writes: >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: *) also, isn't it possible to change text cast influencing GUCs 'n' times p

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-05 Thread Chris Browne
mmonc...@gmail.com (Merlin Moncure) writes: > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >>> *) also, isn't it possible to change text cast influencing GUCs 'n' >>> times per statement considering any query can call a function and a

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-04 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> *) also, isn't it possible to change text cast influencing GUCs 'n' >> times per statement considering any query can call a function and any >> function can say, change datestyle?  Should

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > *) also, isn't it possible to change text cast influencing GUCs 'n' > times per statement considering any query can call a function and any > function can say, change datestyle?  Shouldn't the related functions > be marked 'volatile', not sta

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-04 Thread Merlin Moncure
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Merlin Moncure writes: >> While chatting with Haas off-list regarding how the new array/string >> functions should work (see the thread in its glory here: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org/msg148865.html) >> the debate  m

Re: [HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-04 Thread Tom Lane
Merlin Moncure writes: > While chatting with Haas off-list regarding how the new array/string > functions should work (see the thread in its glory here: > http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org/msg148865.html) > the debate morphed into the relative pros and cons about the propos

[HACKERS] Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index

2010-08-04 Thread Merlin Moncure
While chatting with Haas off-list regarding how the new array/string functions should work (see the thread in its glory here: http://www.mail-archive.com/pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org/msg148865.html) the debate morphed into the relative pros and cons about the proposed concat() being marked stable