Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> Following up something Pavel wrote, I notice that json_agg() and
>>> json_object_agg() are both marked as immutable, even though they invoke IO
>>> functions, while json_object is marked s
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > Following up something Pavel wrote, I notice that json_agg() and
> > json_object_agg() are both marked as immutable, even though they invoke IO
> > functions, while json_object is marked stable, even though it does
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Is it too late to change them? Either way, it seems fairly
> implausible someone would come up with a case to stick json_agg(), or
> any aggregate function really, inside of an index. So it's not exactly
> the crime of the century.
Indexes
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Following up something Pavel wrote, I notice that json_agg() and
> json_object_agg() are both marked as immutable, even though they invoke IO
> functions, while json_object is marked stable, even though it does not, and
> can probably be mar
Following up something Pavel wrote, I notice that json_agg() and
json_object_agg() are both marked as immutable, even though they invoke
IO functions, while json_object is marked stable, even though it does
not, and can probably be marked as immutable. Mea maxima culpa.
I'm not sure what we sh
