Thread: 8.2.4 Won't Build 8.1 Functional Indexes

I am testing upgrades to 8.2.4 from 8.1.3 and am having problems with 8.2.4 balking at the functional indexes I have created.  These indexes exist and work fine in 8.1.3, so why is 8.2.4 rejecting them?

Index 1:
CREATE INDEX acceptedbilling_to_date_accepted_billing_dt_idx
  ON acceptedbilling
  USING btree
  (to_date(accepted_billing_dt::text, 'yyyymmdd'::text));.

Reject:
ERROR: functions in index expression must be marked IMMUTABLE
SQL state: 42P17

Index 2:
CREATE INDEX header_835_billing_idx
  ON ct_835.header_835
  USING btree
  (to_date(to_char(create_timestamp, 'yyyy-mm-dd'::text), 'yyyy-mm-dd'::text));

Reject:
ERROR: functions in index expression must be marked IMMUTABLE
SQL state: 42P17


This is on 8.2.4 installed from the official RPMS.

thanks,

Chris
RH AS 4
PG 8.2.4 from RPMS

Chris Hoover escribió:
> I am testing upgrades to 8.2.4 from 8.1.3 and am having problems with
> 8.2.4balking at the functional indexes I have created.  These indexes
> exist and
> work fine in 8.1.3, so why is 8.2.4 rejecting them?
>
> Index 1:
> CREATE INDEX acceptedbilling_to_date_accepted_billing_dt_idx
>  ON acceptedbilling
>  USING btree
>  (to_date(accepted_billing_dt::text, 'yyyymmdd'::text));.
>
> Reject:
> ERROR: functions in index expression must be marked IMMUTABLE
> SQL state: 42P17

You can't do this because to_date and other functions are not immutable.
8.2 seems to be more picky about this -- the date conversions of
timestamptz columns are dependent on the current timezone.  Perhaps you
could change this to avoid this kind of conversions, doing things like

create index foo on bar
(to_date(accepted_billing_dt at time zone 'GMT'), 'yyymmdd')

I am not sure if this actually works -- but you would need to change the
queries as well.  The point is that the time zone is now fixed, instead
of being dependent on a GUC variable.

--
Alvaro Herrera                 http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/DXLWNGRJD34J
"I think my standards have lowered enough that now I think 'good design'
is when the page doesn't irritate the living f*ck out of me." (JWZ)

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> You can't do this because to_date and other functions are not immutable.
> 8.2 seems to be more picky about this -- the date conversions of
> timestamptz columns are dependent on the current timezone.

The reason 8.2 is more picky is that the function is less immutable
thanks to the addition of locale-dependent functionality:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2006-11/msg00264.php

I gather that the underlying column is timestamp without tz, or it would
never have worked in 8.1 either.  That being the case, these index
definitions seem pretty darn stupid anyway --- why aren't you just
indexing on date_trunc or a plain cast to date?

            regards, tom lane

Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > You can't do this because to_date and other functions are not immutable.
> > 8.2 seems to be more picky about this -- the date conversions of
> > timestamptz columns are dependent on the current timezone.
>
> The reason 8.2 is more picky is that the function is less immutable
> thanks to the addition of locale-dependent functionality:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2006-11/msg00264.php

Ah.  It was a good try in any case I think :-P  The reason I confused the
issue is that I had been fiddling with date_trunc on a timestamptz
column and found that it didn't really work as I expected.  (I can't
recall exactly ATM but I think it was 8.1 anyway).

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

Well, the one index:
CREATE INDEX acceptedbilling_to_date

Chris Hoover wrote:
> Well, the one index:
> CREATE INDEX acceptedbilling_to_date

> The second index is rather stupid, it was an early index before I
> figured out how to split a timestamp.
>
> Anyway, is there a way to make the first index work?  Otherwise we end
> up with a seq scan on our billing table which is very painful.

First, please do not top post:

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html

Second:

create function mydate(varchar) returns varchar AS $$ select
to_char($1::date,'YYYYMMDD'); $$ LANGUAGE SQL IMMUTABLE;

create index foobar on date_test(mydate(date));

You will need to test this, but it does allow you to create the index.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
>
> On 6/6/07, *Tom Lane* <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote:
>
>     Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com
>     <mailto:alvherre@commandprompt.com>> writes:
>      > You can't do this because to_date and other functions are not
>     immutable.
>      > 8.2 seems to be more picky about this -- the date conversions of
>      > timestamptz columns are dependent on the current timezone.
>
>     The reason 8.2 is more picky is that the function is less immutable
>     thanks to the addition of locale-dependent functionality:
>     http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2006-11/msg00264.php
>
>     I gather that the underlying column is timestamp without tz, or it would
>     never have worked in 8.1 either.  That being the case, these index
>     definitions seem pretty darn stupid anyway --- why aren't you just
>     indexing on date_trunc or a plain cast to date?
>
>                             regards, tom lane
>
>


--

       === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
              http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/