Re: avoid pulling up subquerys that contain volatile functions?

On 10/9/05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Jaime Casanova <systemguards(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On 10/8/05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> This is exactly the same example discussed in previous threads on this
> >> issue. Do you think it will change anyone's mind?
>
> > in any case, i still think that is better to get bad performance
> > because i forgot to correctly mark a function that to get incorrect
> > data from a correct query because a "gotcha"... there is a precedent
> > for this in postgres???
>
> Just to be clear, I'm in favor of changing it; but the majority opinion
> in the previous discussion seemed to be against.
>
>[snipped some interesting explanation about this]
>
> regards, tom lane
>

Maybe, document it? even with an example? and the workaround of course

--
regards,
Jaime Casanova
(DBA: DataBase Aniquilator ;)