Re: pg_class.relistemp

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> There are a ton of
>> things that change with each release, and all we do by putting in
>> hacks for backwards compatibility is add bloat that needs to be
>> maintained, and encourage vendors to be lazy.

> I don't agree that having comprehensive system views with multi-version
> stability would be a "hack".

If we had that, it wouldn't be a hack. Putting in a hack to cover the
specific case of relistemp, on the other hand, is just a hack.

The real question here, IMO, is "how many applications are there that
really need to know about temporary relations, but have no interest in
the related feature of unlogged relations?". Because only such apps
would be served by a compatibility hack for this. An app that thinks it
knows the semantics of relistemp, and isn't updated to grok unlogged
tables, may be worse than broken --- it may be silently incorrect.

regards, tom lane