X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3318632B4B6 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 20:29:55 +0100 (BST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 43420-07 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 19:29:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [200.46.204.72]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 754D632A434 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 18:37:58 +0100 (BST) Received: from news.hub.org (news.hub.org [200.46.204.72]) by news.hub.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i92Hbrc3007939 for ; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 17:37:56 GMT (envelope-from news@news.hub.org) Received: (from news@localhost) by news.hub.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i92HEmMv003646 for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Sat, 2 Oct 2004 17:14:48 GMT From: Gaetano Mendola X-Newsgroups: comp.databases.postgresql.hackers Subject: Re: Mislabeled timestamp functions (was Re: [SQL] [NOVICE] date_trunc'd Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 10:43:01 +0200 Organization: PYRENET Midi-pyrenees Provider Lines: 25 Message-ID: <415E6A15.1090105@bigfoot.com> References: <20041001182830.GA20624@wolff.to> <13492.1096656574@sss.pgh.pa.us> <15677.1096671183@sss.pgh.pa.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@pyrenet.fr To: Tom Lane User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: <15677.1096671183@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.86.1.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200410/40 X-Sequence-Number: 59543 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" > What I'm inclined to do with these is change pg_proc.h but not force an > initdb. Does anyone want to argue for an initdb to force it to be fixed > in 8.0? We've lived with the wrong labelings for some time now without > noticing, so it doesn't seem like a serious enough bug to force a > post-beta initdb ... to me anyway. I think that an initdb is not required but at least a script, released only with the 8.0, that will update the catalogs could be usefull. Regards Gaetano Mendola