From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PFC <lists(at)peufeu(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal |
Date: | 2006-05-11 20:00:28 |
Message-ID: | 20060511200028.GM99570@pervasive.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 08:43:46PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 11:35:34AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> > I can say that I've seen plenty of instances where the ability to create
> > temporary tables very quickly with no overhead over the original query would
> > be useful.
>
> I wonder if this requires what the standard refers to as a global
> temporary table. As I read it (which may be wrong, I find the language
> obtuse), a global temporary table is a temporary table whose structure
> is predefined. So, you'd define it once, updating the catalog only once
> but still get a table that is emptied each startup.
>
> Ofcourse, it may not be what the standard means, but it still seems
> like a useful idea, to cut down on schema bloat.
IIRC that's the exact syntax Oracle uses:
CREATE GLOBAL TEMPORARY TABLE ...
I always found it a bit odd, since it always seemed to me like a global
temporary table would be one that every backend could read... something
akin to a real table that doesn't worry about fsync or any of that (and
is potentially not backed on disk at all).
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-05-11 20:07:11 | Re: BEGIN inside transaction should be an error |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-05-11 19:58:33 | Re: sblock state on FreeBSD 6.1 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Mayer | 2006-05-11 20:04:16 | Re: [PERFORM] Arguments Pro/Contra Software Raid |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-05-11 19:57:10 | Re: [HACKERS] Big IN() clauses etc : feature proposal |