I newer talked about persistent data. I talked about persistent metadata.

Sure, I finally understood that detail. Now if I hear "persistent variable", I by default understand that both metadata and data are persistent... It requires some effort to understand the subtelty.

I really don't propose any possible substitution of tables (relations). I newer did it.


The used terminology is not 100% clean and natural - maybe better name is
"global temporary unshared untransactional unrelational storage" -

Hmmm. Too long:-) But these properties need to be spelled out.

[...] I don't see any sense to have two similar storages or two redundant access methods - not in PostgreSQL level.

Then say so in the wiki in the cons.

Personnaly, I'm not sure. Maybe having a clean way of declaring a one-row "singleton" table enforced by postgresql would be enough.


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

Reply via email to