Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1r3Hcb-002vAp-37 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 15:16:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1r3HcZ-0008IK-IA for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 15:16:03 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1r3HcZ-0008IB-8h for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 15:16:03 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1r3HcS-005iKz-Hp for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 15:16:01 +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 3AFFFtJa2661436; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 10:15:55 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Aleksander Alekseev cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, James Keener Subject: Re: BUG #18097: Immutable expression not allowed in generated at In-reply-to: References: <18097-ebb179674f22932f@postgresql.org> <118FF128-C9CA-490C-8E67-65888EE8283F@jimkeener.com> <1887197.1694189299@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2250243.1694287087@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2275069.1694300202@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2502479.1699984134@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Aleksander Alekseev message dated "Wed, 15 Nov 2023 14:44:09 +0300" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2661434.1700061355.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 10:15:55 -0500 Message-ID: <2661435.1700061355@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Aleksander Alekseev writes: >>> Oh no! We encountered one of the most difficult problems in computer >>> science [1]. >> Indeed :-(. Looking at it again this morning, I'm thinking of >> using "contain_mutable_functions_after_planning" --- what do you >> think of that? > It's better but creates an impression that the actual planning will be > involved. True, but from the perspective of the affected code, the question is basically "did you call expression_planner() yet". So I like this naming for that connection, whereas something based on "transformation" doesn't really connect to anything in existing function names. regards, tom lane