Re: [HACKERS] SetQuerySnapshot, once again

2002-06-18 Thread Tom Lane
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Sorry, I don't understand ... Let t be a table which is defined as create table t (id serial primary key, dt text); Then is the following function *stable* ? create function f1(int4) returns text as ' declare txt

Re: [HACKERS] SetQuerySnapshot, once again

2002-06-18 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
-Original Message- From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Tom Lane wrote: Sorry, I don't understand ... Let t be a table which is defined as create table t (id serial primary key, dt text); Then is the following function

Re: [HACKERS] SetQuerySnapshot, once again

2002-06-18 Thread Tom Lane
Hiroshi Inoue [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm not sure exactly what you mean by stable here. Wasn't it you who defined *stable* as Cachable within a single command: given fixed input values, the result will not change if the function were to be repeatedly evaluated within a single SQL

Re: [HACKERS] SetQuerySnapshot, once again

2002-06-18 Thread Hiroshi Inoue
Tom Lane wrote: "Hiroshi Inoue" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I already mentioned an opinion in 2001/09/08. Both the command counters and the snapshots in a function should advance except the leading SELECT statements. I do not like the idea of treating the first select in a