Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lmGKw-0006yT-O9 for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 27 May 2021 13:46:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lmGKv-0004LB-OA for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 27 May 2021 13:46:09 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lmGKv-0004L0-Hq for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 27 May 2021 13:46:09 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lmGKt-0004Ia-KL for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 27 May 2021 13:46:09 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 14RDjvjS1709811; Thu, 27 May 2021 09:45:57 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: =?GBK?B?tcK45w==?= cc: "David G. Johnston" , "pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: BUG #17036: generated column cann't modifyed auto when update In-reply-to: References: <17036-e4d41f4221873a17@postgresql.org> <23824c32.12e8.179ab97fa8a.Coremail.digoal@126.com> <2e46e6b5.1930.179abb8b6c0.Coremail.digoal@126.com> Comments: In-reply-to =?GBK?B?tcK45w==?= message dated "Thu, 27 May 2021 17:21:34 +0800" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1709809.1622123157.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 09:45:57 -0400 Message-ID: <1709810.1622123157@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk =3D?GBK?B?tcK45w=3D=3D?=3D writes: > If the value of the immutable function changes, the immutable function s= hould be recalculated. You misunderstand completely. An immutable marking on a function is a promise from you to the system that the function's value does NOT change. Therefore, the predicate of your statement is vacuous, and we need not discuss whether the conclusion is interesting. If there's some behavior that you don't like as a consequence of your lie, then stop lying. regards, tom lane