Re: Question on STABLE functions limitations

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Marc Mamin <M(dot)Mamin(at)intershop(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Question on STABLE functions limitations
Date: 2010-10-18 14:30:53
Message-ID: AANLkTi=r2RH6S+Boqg0t9Mvqj66DBa3fpiwBXyx9BbOA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:47 AM, Marc Mamin <M(dot)Mamin(at)intershop(dot)de> wrote:
> I wonder if there are some special cases where STABLE functions should be
> avoided.
>
> I think for example of functions using set_config or querying the advisory
> locks.

Advisory locks are highly volatile and everything that touches them
should be considered volatile. They are completely outside the mvcc
snapshot system and aren't bound by its rules (sequences also fall
under this category).

merlin

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Kupershmidt 2010-10-18 14:43:32 Re: [GENERAL] column-level update privs + lock table
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-10-18 14:27:37 Re: [GENERAL] column-level update privs + lock table