On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On tis, 2010-02-23 at 16:54 -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> > >> > There may be some value in inventing a "has no side effects" marker, but >> > that should not be confused with IMMUTABLE/STABLE. >> > >> >> a READONLY function? > > SQL standard: > > <SQL-data access indication> ::= > NO SQL > | CONTAINS SQL > | READS SQL DATA > | MODIFIES SQL DATA >
good! > Notice also that this is separate from > > <deterministic characteristic> ::= > DETERMINISTIC > | NOT DETERMINISTIC > so IMMUTABLE = DETERMINISTIC NO SQL, STABLE = DETERMINISTIC READS SQL DATA VOLATILE = NOT DETERMINISTIC MODIFIES SQL DATA > which is the SQL standard's variant of volatility. > > So someone has already had the idea that these two should exist > separately. > seems something we should implement -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL AsesorÃa y desarrollo de sistemas Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. +59387171157 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
