Re: Removal of temp tables

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I am wondering if pg_temp tables should even be seen as system tables by
> IsSystemRelationName(). We have to call them pg_ so user applications
> don't display them, but other than that they aren't like system tables.
> Comments?

This oughta be discussed on pghackers, not just -patches. But my
thought is that we need a three-way distinction; at least some of the
IsSystemRelation checks presumably *should* accept temp relnames, else
we'd not have decided to do it that way in the first place.

Another point is that when we implement schemas (= Real Soon Now, I
trust), the whole business of temprels having different physical and
logical relnames will go away anyhow. Temp rels will become plain rels
that live in a temp schema. So it may not be worth adding further
complexity to support the present approach. We'll just have to rip
it out again ... better to expend the work on making schemas.

regards, tom lane