Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-11-18 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 06:00:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > [ mark unaccent functions immutable ] > > > Applied. > > This patch is flat out wrong and needs to be reverted. > > The functions were correctly marked (by you!) in commit > c0577c92a84cc477a88fe6868c16c4a7e33

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-11-08 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian writes: > [ mark unaccent functions immutable ] > Applied. This patch is flat out wrong and needs to be reverted. The functions were correctly marked (by you!) in commit c0577c92a84cc477a88fe6868c16c4a7e3348b11 on the basis of the discussion of bug #5781, http://www.postgresql.org

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian escribió: > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 02:25:25PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Bruce Momjian escribió: > > > > > Do we need to update any version or anything? I didn't think so. > > > > I think there should be an 1.1 version here. That way, if somebody is > > using the existing d

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 02:25:25PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian escribió: > > > Do we need to update any version or anything? I didn't think so. > > I think there should be an 1.1 version here. That way, if somebody is > using the existing definition from the 1.0 module, they ca

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian escribió: > Do we need to update any version or anything? I didn't think so. I think there should be an 1.1 version here. That way, if somebody is using the existing definition from the 1.0 module, they can get the new definition by doing an extension upgrade. -- Álvaro Herrera

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Pavel Stehule
2013/10/8 Bruce Momjian > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 06:38:30PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > I am not sure - does pg_upgrade change of flag after upgrade without > increasing > > version number? > > What happens in pg_upgrade is that the CREATE EXTENSION command is > pg_dump'ed, and run by pg_upr

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 06:38:30PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > I am not sure - does pg_upgrade change of flag after upgrade without > increasing > version number? What happens in pg_upgrade is that the CREATE EXTENSION command is pg_dump'ed, and run by pg_uprade, and it then pulls from the SQL

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Pavel Stehule
2013/10/8 Bruce Momjian > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 06:31:03PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > > > > > 2013/10/8 Bruce Momjian > > > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 05:36:58PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:15:47AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > > > On Sat, S

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 06:31:03PM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > > > 2013/10/8 Bruce Momjian > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 05:36:58PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:15:47AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Pavel Stehule >

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Pavel Stehule
2013/10/8 Bruce Momjian > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 05:36:58PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:15:47AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Pavel Stehule < > pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> I have developed the attached patch based on

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-10-08 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 05:36:58PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:15:47AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Pavel Stehule > > wrote: > > >> I have developed the attached patch based on your suggestion. I did not > > >> see anything in the co

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-09-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:15:47AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Pavel Stehule > wrote: > >> I have developed the attached patch based on your suggestion. I did not > >> see anything in the code that would make it STABLE, except a lookup of a > >> dictionary librar

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-09-17 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> I have developed the attached patch based on your suggestion. I did not >> see anything in the code that would make it STABLE, except a lookup of a >> dictionary library: >> >> dictOid = get_ts_dict_oid(stringToQualifiedNameList("un

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-09-14 Thread Pavel Stehule
2013/9/11 Bruce Momjian > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:30:29AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > Hello > > > > There was a proposal to change flag of function to immutable - should > > be used in indexes > > > > CREATE FUNCTION unaccent(regdictionary, text) > > RETURNS text > > AS 'MO

Re: [HACKERS] unaccent module - two params function should be immutable

2013-09-10 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:30:29AM +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > Hello > > There was a proposal to change flag of function to immutable - should > be used in indexes > > CREATE FUNCTION unaccent(regdictionary, text) > RETURNS text > AS 'MODULE_PATHNAME', 'unaccent_dict' >