Re: idea: global temp tables

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: idea: global temp tables
Date: 2009-04-28 15:59:37
Message-ID: 49F6E199.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> GLOBAL/LOCAL TEMP TABLE distinction is not related to cross-session
> persistence of the table definitions

On a re-read, I think I see your point -- it is the DECLARE LOCAL TEMP
TABLE versus CREATE { GLOBAL | LOCAL } TEMP TABLE which determines
whether the table definition is persisted. 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?

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2009-04-28 16:05:43 Re: idea: global temp tables
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-04-28 15:58:31 Re: idea: global temp tables