The PostgreSQL FAQ currently suggests using dynamic SQL as a workaround
for the table OID caching problem of temp tables in pg/pgsql functions.
While this is ok, it fails to suggest that besides the initial
create/drop statements, every statement that touches the table must also
be dynamic.
With 8
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> The PostgreSQL FAQ currently suggests using dynamic SQL as a workaround
> for the table OID caching problem of temp tables in pg/pgsql functions.
> While this is ok, it fails to suggest that besides the initial
> create/drop statements, every statement that touches the table
Bruce Momijan wrote:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
> > The PostgreSQL FAQ currently suggests using dynamic SQL as a
workaround
> > for the table OID caching problem of temp tables in pg/pgsql
functions.
> > While this is ok, it fails to suggest that besides the initial
> > create/drop statements, every s
# [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-02-04 12:30:00 -0500:
> would be more appropriate in the proper documentation than in a FAQ.
Every FAQ is an excuse for proper documentation. :)
--
FreeBSD 4.10-STABLE
8:56PM up 13 hrs, 8 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
---(end of br
Attached are my first thoughts for the amended instructions.
Mark Kirkwood wrote:
But to be on the safe side, it would make sense to do something similar
to the BSD section, and comment about older distributions maybe needing
to manipulate /proc/kernel/* directly.
--- runtime.sgml.orig Fri Feb
Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-02-04 12:30:00 -0500:
> > would be more appropriate in the proper documentation than in a FAQ.
>
> Every FAQ is an excuse for proper documentation. :)
I disagree. The FAQs are really to document items where the place to a
look for a solutio
# [email protected] / 2005-02-04 17:17:47 -0500:
> Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-02-04 12:30:00 -0500:
> > > would be more appropriate in the proper documentation than in a FAQ.
> >
> > Every FAQ is an excuse for proper documentation. :)
>
> I disagree. The FAQs
>Roman Neuhauser
> # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-02-04 12:30:00 -0500:
> > would be more appropriate in the proper documentation than in a FAQ.
>
> Every FAQ is an excuse for proper documentation. :)
>
Your contributions are always welcome to any form of documentation.
Proper is in the eye of th
