Re: Non-standard feature request

From: Rocco Altier <roccoa(at)routescape(dot)com>
To: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Non-standard feature request
Date: 2002-06-14 23:09:44
Message-ID: Pine.A41.4.21.0206141908200.325716-100000@apdev
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:

> That is what I want to do, except by extending the grammar. I must admit
> to actually being surprised that a TEMP table created inside a
> transaction lived after the transaction completed. That's when I looked
> at the standard and saw that PostgreSQL's implementation was correct. I
> would think for most people session-long temp tables are more the
> exception than the rule. But I guess SQL92 doesn't think so. Regardless,
> a couple of other people have shown some interest in the idea. I'll post
> it to general as well as Tom suggests...
>
Actually, we needed to use temp tables that live beyond the transaction,
because there are no session variables in postgres. So I did an
implementation that used temp tables instead.

Having the temp table not live for the life of the session would be a big
problem for me.

-rocco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2002-06-15 00:12:10 Re: I must be blind...
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2002-06-14 23:07:56 Re: Making serial survive pg_dump

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Mascari 2002-06-15 10:32:30 Re: Non-standard feature request
Previous Message Manfred Koizar 2002-06-14 22:18:24 Re: Reduce heap tuple header size