Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 9:22 AM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> (I think we could drop the savepoint
>> too, no?)
> One advantage of keeping the savepoint is that we don't need to
> explicitly drop the objects which we have created temporarily for this
> test.
They'll go away anyway at the end of the transaction that the whole
script is wrapped in. (But it might be worth choosing slightly less
generic object names, to avoid a conflict against other sub-tests
later in that script.)
regards, tom lane
