On 10/9/05, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jaime Casanova <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 10/8/05, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 ;)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
