From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Emmanuel Cecchet <manu(at)asterdata(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Re: Transactions and temp tables] |
Date: | 2009-01-22 13:01:21 |
Message-ID: | 49786E21.90503@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> IMHO, this is just getting too kludgey. We came up with pretty good
>> ideas on how to handle temp tables properly, by treating the same as
>> non-temp tables. That should eliminate all the problems the latest patch
>> did, and also the issues with sequences, and allow all access to temp
>> tables, not just a limited subset. I don't think it's worthwhile to
>> apply the kludge as a stopgap measure, let's do it properly in 8.5.
>> ...
>
> Can someone tell me how this should be worded as a TODO item?
There already is a todo item about this:
"Allow prepared transactions with temporary tables created and dropped
in the same transaction, and when an ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS temporary
table is accessed "
I added a link to the email describing the most recent idea on how this
should be implemented.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-01-22 13:45:28 | Re: Pluggable Indexes (was Re: rmgr hooks (v2)) |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-01-22 12:52:44 | Re: Pluggable Indexes (was Re: rmgr hooks (v2)) |