Re: idea: global temp tables

"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> ... Both forms of CREATE TEMP
> TABLE should persist the definition if you go by the standard, so you
> don't want to muddy the waters by complying on one and not the other?

Right. This goes back to our old principle of trying not to use
spec-defined syntax for not-per-spec behavior. We are already behind
the eight ball as far as temp tables go, but let's not make it worse by
blindly picking some spec-defined syntax without a plan for where we go
from here. (I'm assuming that it's reasonably likely that we will want
a spec-compatible module feature someday. We'll really have painted
ourselves into a corner if we don't think about the issue now.)

regards, tom lane