From: | "Shoaib Mir" <shoaibmir(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Bruno Wolff III" <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, jws <jsacksteder(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: temp tables in functions? |
Date: | 2007-02-08 07:29:37 |
Message-ID: | bf54be870702072329v75f8d1fbm1e5201a960efd566@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Something like this will help you:
execute immediate 'create temporary table test (a number) on commit drop';
--
Shoaib Mir
EnterpriseDB (www.enterprisedb.com)
On 2/8/07, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 20:40:09 -0800,
> jws <jsacksteder(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Having developed a complex query, I want to wrap it up as a function
> > so that it can take a parameter and return a set of rows. This query
> > is currently written as multiple sql statements that create a few
> > interstitial temp tables that are then joined. If I put this into a
> > function definition, do those temp tables get dropped automatically
> > when the function returns?
>
> See: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/sql-createtable.html
> So, the answer is no.
>
> Also note that currently Postgres will cache information about tables
> used in functions and this may not work well when you are dropping and
> recreating tables with the same name in the same session. For that kind
> of thing you need to use EXECUTE to avoid caching.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | brian | 2007-02-08 07:40:07 | Re: 'greatest' function? |
Previous Message | Shane Ambler | 2007-02-08 06:55:24 | Re: accidentally deleted user --> postgres |