> On Jun 9, 2017, at 4:20 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com> wrote: > > On 06/09/2017 02:01 PM, armand pirvu wrote: >>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 06/09/2017 01:31 PM, armand pirvu wrote: >>> >>>>> > > >> By temporary tables I mean just regular table not tables created by "create >> temporary table" . I should have been more precise. We call them temporary >> since we do drop them after all is said and done. Maybe we should change the >> way we call them > > You will want to look at this before making that decision: > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/sql-createtable.html > > Temporary Tables > > > Basically, temporary tables are session specific. >
I noticed that, but since we use multiple schemas can not have a session temp table in non temp schema We have those in place for a specific reason in case we mess some processing in between and we want to be able to have the data which we started with. > >> 9.5 but considering I can track what auto vacuum does I was thinking to use >> that as a reason to the upgrade advantage > > It is nice, you just have to weigh against what effect the other changes: > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.6/static/release-9-6.html > > might have on your setup. > > As of now I don’t think we have a draw back per se. We are poised to go live on Postgres soon though so I was thinking maybe have this upgrade done before going live ? Just a thought > > -- > Adrian Klaver > adrian.kla...@aklaver.com -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
