Re: Global temporary tables

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Global temporary tables
Date: 2026-06-22 13:43:00
Message-ID: 251A02BE-A148-4FEF-90EB-5E9559310B8E@dunslane.net
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Jun 22, 2026, at 4:57 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 at 23:06, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>>
>> Wow, we're on the same track. I have a patch series for exactly this
>> feature that I was about to submit.
>>
>> FTR here's where I'm at. I'll try to take a look at yours ASAP.
>
> Oh, wow. There's a lot of similarity between our patchsets, which is
> reassuring, but there are also a number of differences, which I need
> to think about in more detail.

Yeah, agree on both fronts. The main areas I see are the catalog and handling wraparound. I don’t think there’s necessarily a clear winner on either, so I’ll be interested to hear what others say.

Cheers

Andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2026-06-22 13:50:52 Re: RFC: Logging plan of the running query
Previous Message Akshay Joshi 2026-06-22 13:19:27 Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_policy_ddl() function to reconstruct CREATE POLICY statement