| From: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [Patch] Temporary tables that do not bloat pg_catalog (a.k.a fast temp tables) |
| Date: | 2016-08-17 00:03:22 |
| Message-ID: | 95bdc353-1a89-3fe3-1181-eba558c4df83@BlueTreble.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/16/16 11:59 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
...
> That doesn't really solve the problem, because OTHER backends won't be
> able to see them. So, if I create a fast temporary table in one
> session that depends on a permanent object, some other session can
> drop the permanent object. If there were REAL catalog entries, that
> wouldn't work, because the other session would see the dependency.
Some discussion about TEMP functions is happening on -general right now,
and there's other things where temp objects are good to have, so it'd be
nice to have a more generic fix for this stuff. Is the idea of
"partitioning" the catalogs to store temp objects separate from
permanent fatally flawed?
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532) mobile: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-17 00:35:18 | Re: Keeping CURRENT_DATE and similar constructs in original format |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-08-16 23:56:47 | Re: anyelement -> anyrange |