Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add ERROR msg for GLOBAL/LOCAL TEMP is not yet implemented

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add ERROR msg for GLOBAL/LOCAL TEMP is not yet implemented
Date: 2012-06-09 17:41:55
Message-ID: CA+TgmoafAHvsMvne=fyoeOvu8uod=Cu6-WcXBQxrqzJu=3_z6w@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Simon Riggs  wrote:
>> On 9 June 2012 16:46, Tom Lane  wrote:
>>> Simon Riggs  writes:
>>>> Add ERROR msg for GLOBAL/LOCAL TEMP is not yet implemented
>>>
>>> I don't believe there was actual consensus for this change,
>>
>> It was hardly a subject of marked disagreement.
>
> Regarding GLOBAL, the three comments so far have been along the same
> lines.  But I assumed this was a 9.3 discussion.

I assumed it was a 9.2 discussion.

>> Why would we do it for GLOBAL but not LOCAL also?
>
> Because the current support for temporary tables is relatively
> similar to the standard's description of LOCAL TEMPORARY TABLES, but
> nothing at all like the standard's descri0ption of GLOBAL TEMPORARY
> TABLES.  Now, I would love for us to also support DECLARE LOCAL
> TEMPORARY TABLE, for a table for which the name would only be in
> scope within a given code block, but that wouldn't require breaking
> the existing syntax, as far as I can see.

+1.  I definitely see no point in complaining about LOCAL TEMP.

> In terms of roll-out, I think a warning for at least a release or two
> before actually throwing an error would make sense, even for GLOBAL.
> If we seriously think that global temporary tables might be a 9.3
> item, maybe a notice or warning in 9.2 could be justified; but we are
> on the second beta, so we need a pretty solid reason for any
> behavioral change at this point.

I am not sure that an ERROR on GLOBAL TEMP will break very much; there
is little reason for anyone to be using that syntax.  However, a
WARNING is OK with me, too.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2012-06-09 21:43:53
Subject: Re: Ability to listen on two unix sockets
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2012-06-09 17:09:01
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add ERROR msg for GLOBAL/LOCAL TEMP is not yet implemented

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group