Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> we have already concluded that the spec's
> GLOBAL/LOCAL TEMP TABLE distinction is not related
> to cross-session persistence of the table definitions
How do you reconcile that conclusion with the following,
from ISO/IEC 9075-2:2003 (E), 4.14 Tables:
"The definition of a global temporary table or a created local
temporary table appears in a schema. In SQL language, the name and the
scope of the name of a global temporary table or a created local
temporary table are indistinguishable from those of a persistent base
table. However, because global temporary table contents are distinct
within SQL-sessions, and created local temporary tables are distinct
within SQL-client modules within SQL-sessions, the effective <schema
name> of the schema in which the global temporary table or the created
local temporary table is instantiated is an implementation-dependent
<schema name> that may be thought of as having been effectively
derived from the <schema name> of the schema in which the global
temporary table or created local temporary table is defined and the
implementation-dependent SQL- session identifier associated with the
SQL-session."
There is a distinction between the definition, which "appears in a
schema" and for which "the name and the scope ... are
indistinguishable from those of a persistent base table", versus the
effective schema in which an instance is materialized, which is
session and/or module dependent.
-Kevin