Re: Temp table or normal table for performance?

On 2009-08-19, Stephen Cook <sclists(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Let's say I have a function that needs to collect some data from various
> tables and process and sort them to be returned to the user.

plpgsql functions don't play well with temp tables IME.
there are work-arounds and they are ugly. if you caus use a different
language it could work.

> In general, would it be better to create a temporary table in that
> function, do the work and sorting there, and return it... or keep a
> permanent table for pretty much the same thing, but add a "user session"
> field and return the relevant rows from that and then delete them?

> Sorry this is vague, I know it most likely depends on the workload and
> such, but I'm just putting this together now. I could go either way, and
> also switch it up in the future if necessary. Is there a rule of thumb
> on this one? I'm a bit biased against temporary tables, but then again
> if the normal table gets a lot of action it might not be the optimal choice.

temp tables are usually worth the effort.