| From: | Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Karl Schnaitter <karlsch(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
| Date: | 2010-02-26 04:20:21 |
| Message-ID: | 9362e74e1002252020j1917d6fl95dbd12b82a02a8f@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
>>
> First of all, volatility is not the only issue. The ordering ops could also
> be incorrect, e.g., violate the transitivity property. there is no reliable
> way to determine if a function is volatile and/or incorrectly specified.
>
No it is the only issue. If you create a datatype with volatile function for
ordering ops, then you have the broken data type(the one you are referring
to). So they are one and the same.
Thanks,
Gokul.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gokulakannan Somasundaram | 2010-02-26 04:24:08 | Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2010-02-26 04:19:47 | Re: visibility maps and heap_prune |