On 7/9/15 12:45 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:

2015-07-09 7:32 GMT+02:00 Zhaomo Yang <zhy...@cs.ucsd.edu

    >  I am not sure, if it is not useless work.

    I don't understand why an implementation taking approach 2.a would
    be useless. As I said, its performance will be no worse than current
    temp tables and it will provide a lot of convenience to users who
    need to create temp tables in every session.

Surely it should be step forward. But you will to have to solve lot of
problems with "duplicated" tables in system catalogue, and still it
doesn't solve the main problem with temporary tables - the bloating
catalogue - and related performance degradation.

That being the "main" problem is strictly a matter of opinion based on your experience. Many people don't have a performance problem today, but do have to deal with all the pain of handling this manually (as well as all the limitations that go with that).

If it's easy to fix the bloat problem at the same time as adding GLOBAL TEMP then great! But there's no reason to reject this just because it doesn't fix that issue.
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to