Re: [HACKERS] CREATE TEMP TABLE .... ON COMMIT

Bruce,

I intend on addressing this by completely rewriting the patch. When I
spoke to Tom and yourself about merging it with 7.3 at OSCON I argued that
storing the ON COMMIT data in a global linked list was better (strictly
for performance reasons). Given that I've incorrectly implemented DELETE
ROWS, I think I'll bite the bullet and store the ON COMMIT data in the
system catalogues per SQL99. Thoughts?

As for when the patch will arrive: as I said in a previous email, I am
quite busy at the moment. I would like to get this into 7.3, along with
all the other patches or features I've put my hand up for. What will be
the effective cut off for patches of this nature given 7.3 beta at the end
of the month.

Gavin

On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:

>
> Gavin, was this addressed?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
> > > As for your question (and, perhaps, SQL99) I don't seen how it makes any
> > > sense to specify ON COMMIT outside of a transaction block.
> >
> > Surely it does.
> >
> > CREATE TEMP TABLE foo(...) ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS;
> >
> > BEGIN;
> > insert some rows in foo;
> > process rows in foo;
> > COMMIT; -- foo is now empty again
> >
> > BEGIN;
> > insert some rows in foo;
> > process rows in foo;
> > COMMIT; -- foo is now empty again
> >
> > repeat until application quit...
> >
> > What am I missing?
> >
> > regards, tom lane
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
> >
> > http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
> >
>
>