| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "James Mansion" <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Greg Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: idea: global temp tables |
| Date: | 2009-04-30 19:32:20 |
| Message-ID: | 49F9B674.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com> wrote:
> Wouldn't it be cleaner just to defer creation of real files to
support the
> structures associated with a temp table until it i snecessary to
spill the
> data from the backend's RAM? This data doesn't need to be in
> shared memory and the tables and data aren't visible to any other
> session, so can't they run out of RAM most of the time (or all the
> time if the data in them is short lived)?
See this thread for a discussion of the idea:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-11/msg00342.php
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andy Lester | 2009-04-30 20:04:54 | Re: Keyword list sanity check |
| Previous Message | James Mansion | 2009-04-30 19:26:02 | Re: idea: global temp tables |