From: | "Scott Marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | giuseppe(dot)derossi(at)email(dot)it |
Cc: | "Medi Montaseri" <montaseri(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: how to call sql code without function |
Date: | 2007-08-21 15:30:24 |
Message-ID: | dcc563d10708210830n32d948f8qbb0e49222fae031f@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On 8/21/07, giuseppe(dot)derossi(at)email(dot)it <giuseppe(dot)derossi(at)email(dot)it> wrote:
>
> Hi Medi,
> Last night, I wrote a function which perfoms a subset of queries and returns
> the results of a temporary table. It's more fast than I believe and that's
> ok to me.
> There is a prolem : It works too fine. I'm afraid of Murphy's law. I red
> into the Internet that there are problem when there is a temporary table in
> a function. My queries are in direct way, that is, without Execute
> statement.
>
> What kind of problem can arise (session,caching, and so on) ? which should
> be the solution ?
The only real danger of using temp tables is that if you don't vacuum
often enough the system catalogs can get bloated. Also, if you create
a new connection for each access, then you might wind up with a lot of
pg_temp_xxx schemas laying about, but they don't really hurt anything.
Generally speaking temp tables in postgresql are pretty well behaved.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2007-08-21 15:33:38 | Re: How to export query results |
Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2007-08-21 14:57:39 | Re: Dump & Load a database??? |