Re: BUG #18097: Immutable expression not allowed in generated at

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

To: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>

Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, James Keener <jim@jimkeener.com>

Date: 2023-11-15T15:15:55Z

Lists: pgsql-bugs, pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

Ensure we preprocess expressions before checking their volatility.
- f07a3039c72b 16.2 landed
- abd1b1325d60 12.18 landed
- 9bd0f74eac19 14.11 landed
- 9057ddbefe7e 15.6 landed
- 743ddafc7124 17.0 landed
- 5c11104c7d20 13.14 landed

Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com> writes:
>>> Oh no! We encountered one of the most difficult problems in computer
>>> science [1].

>> Indeed :-(.  Looking at it again this morning, I'm thinking of
>> using "contain_mutable_functions_after_planning" --- what do you
>> think of that?

> It's better but creates an impression that the actual planning will be
> involved.

True, but from the perspective of the affected code, the question is
basically "did you call expression_planner() yet".  So I like this
naming for that connection, whereas something based on "transformation"
doesn't really connect to anything in existing function names.

			regards, tom lane