Re: GLOBAL vs LOCAL temp tables

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: GLOBAL vs LOCAL temp tables
Date: 2003-04-16 04:20:06
Message-ID: 12229.1050466806@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> This is fixed in 7.4 already. It wasn't a problem with temp tables, but
>> with btree indexes.

> Yes, it is fixed partly, but I want to point out that the fix somewhat
> asymetric.

Have you actually run any experiments to prove that the current
implementation has a problem?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Sherry 2003-04-16 05:01:25 Testing the return value of fclose() in the backend
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2003-04-16 04:00:39 Re: GLOBAL vs LOCAL temp tables