Re: [HACKERS] to_char not IMMUTABLE?

2007-01-12 Thread Albe Laurenz
Mario Weilguni wrote: > > I had a problem when upgrading a database from 8.1.4 to 8.2.1: > Sorry, the error messages are in german. > > pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error while PROCESSING TOC: > pg_restore: [archiver (db)] Error from TOC entry 1531; 1259 > 3477393 INDEX idx_inspektionen_dat_inspe

Re: [HACKERS] to_char not IMMUTABLE?

2007-01-12 Thread Tom Lane
Mario Weilguni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thanks for the info. Changing this to use extract is no real problem, I was > just curious if this is intendend behaviour. >From the CVS logs: 2006-11-28 14:18 tgl * src/include/catalog/: pg_proc.h (REL7_3_STABLE), pg_proc.h (REL7_4_

Re: [HACKERS] to_char not IMMUTABLE?

2007-01-12 Thread Mario Weilguni
Am Freitag, 12. Januar 2007 14:48 schrieb Martijn van Oosterhout: > On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:55:07AM +0100, Mario Weilguni wrote: > > to_char(timestamp, '') should be constant and marked immutable, > > or am I wrong here? Or is it not marked immutable because of possible > > changes on date_f

Re: [HACKERS] to_char not IMMUTABLE?

2007-01-12 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:55:07AM +0100, Mario Weilguni wrote: > to_char(timestamp, '') should be constant and marked immutable, > or am I wrong here? Or is it not marked immutable because of possible > changes on date_format? AIUI, to_char is not immutable because it can be effected by exter