On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Olleg Samoylov <spl...@ya.ru> writes: > > Looked like random() is "volatile", but in subselect it works like > "stable". > > The point here is that that's an uncorrelated subselect --- ie, it > contains no outer references --- so it need not be, and is not, > re-evaluated at every outer row. > That seems rather circular. Why shouldn't a volatile be honored as volatile just because it is in an uncorrelated sub-select? Cheers, Jeff
