From: Bruno Wolff III <bruno@wolff.to>
To: Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Mislabeled timestamp functions (was Re: [SQL] [NOVICE] date_trunc'd
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 15:04:51 -0500
Message-ID: <20041002200451.GA14830@wolff.to> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <415E6A15.1090105@bigfoot.com>
References: <web-1583353@davinci.ethosmedia.com>
<Pine.GSO.4.10.10409271910480.22691-100000@solarwind>
<20041001182830.GA20624@wolff.to>
<13492.1096656574@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<15677.1096671183@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<415E6A15.1090105@bigfoot.com>
On Sat, Oct 02, 2004 at 10:43:01 +0200,
Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >I wrote:
> >Do you see any other mislabelings?
>
> I don't but I think that the concept of immutable shall be expanded.
> I mean I can use safely a date_trunc immutable in a query ( I think this
> is a sort of "immutable per statement" ) but not in a index definition
> ( the index mantainance is affected by the current timezonesettings ).
> So may be another modifier shall be introduced that reflect the "immutable
> per statement"
There has been such a distinction for a major release or two. "Stable"
is how you mark a function that will return the same value within a
single transaction.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: bruno@wolff.to, mendola@bigfoot.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: Mislabeled timestamp functions (was Re: [SQL] [NOVICE] date_trunc'd
In-Reply-To: <20041002200451.GA14830@wolff.to>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox