Re: Creation of temporary tables on read-only standby servers

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Creation of temporary tables on read-only standby servers
Date: 2010-10-18 19:31:34
Message-ID: AANLkTikm-x149RKLE+27VGu=iKxAXb0PYAvoY+YwX0W=@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 3:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> On Monday 18 October 2010 20:06:01 Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Not unless you have some credible concept for how it might ever be
>>> implemented.  You can't create temp tables because you can't modify
>>> system catalogs, and if you did somehow create them you couldn't put
>>> anything in them because you can't generate XIDs on a slave ... much
>>> less commit them.  We have talked about ways that temp tables might be
>>> created without touching the "real" system catalogs, but the XID issue
>>> seems a complete showstopper.
>
>> Hm. Wouldnt it be possible to use virtual xids for that purpose? They are
>> never seen outside of that session anyway...
>
> Well, maybe, but then you need infrastructure to track whether VXIDs
> committed or aborted.

Seems like this would wreak havoc with the HeapTupleSatisfies* functions.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-10-18 19:33:34 Re: knngist - 0.8
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-10-18 19:29:20 Re: create tablespace fails silently, or succeeds improperly