Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2016-08-07 14:46:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >>> I think the whole idea of a fast temporary table is that there are no >>> catalog entries. If there are no catalog entries, then dependencies >>> are not visible. If there ARE catalog entries, to what do they refer? >>> Without a pg_class entry for the table, there's no table OID upon >>> which to depend.
>> TBH, I think that the chances of such a design getting committed are >> not distinguishable from zero. Tables have to have OIDs; there is just >> too much code that assumes that. And I seriously doubt that it will >> work (for any large value of "work") without catalog entries. > That seems a bit too defeatist. Huh? I didn't say we shouldn't work on the problem --- I just think that this particular approach isn't good. Which you seemed to agree with. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers