Re: Temp rows - is it possible?

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> We recently decided we had to forbid foreign-key references from temp
> >> tables to permanent tables because of this effect. I wonder whether
> >> we won't end up forbidding temp tables as children of permanent tables
> >> too.
>
> > Yep, I think we will have to do that. TODO item?
>
> Plan B would be to arrange for the planner to ignore temp tables of
> other backends whenever it is searching for child tables. Then the
> behavior would be predictable: you never see any rows inserted in other
> people's temp child tables (and cannot update or delete 'em, either).
> I'm not sure if this is the behavior the OP wanted, but it seems at
> least marginally useful.

Agreed. It seems wrong that a session should ever see other people's
temp tables as children.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073