Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>,<david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>,<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, <mike(at)mlfowler(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch
Date: 2010-08-08 17:07:35
Message-ID: 4C5E9E070200002500034334@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Pavel Stehule wrote:

> I didn't use a correct name - so "indexed set" is better.

How would such a thing differ from a RAM-based local temporary table?

-Kevin

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-08-08 17:14:44 Re: review: psql: edit function, show function commands patch
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-08 16:30:12 Re: pg_stat_transaction patch