On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 08:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > SQL99 is pretty clear about temporary tables, at least.
>
> It is ... and in fact the spec's notion of a temp table has nearly
> nothing to do with ours. They contemplate a temp table as an abstract
> tab
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > so, added to TODO:
> > * Have views on temporary tables exist in the temporary namespace
> > TODO updated to remove mention of temporary views.
>
> That's *clearly* backwards. Ignoring our little argument, I think there
> is no d
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > so, added to TODO:
> > * Have views on temporary tables exist in the temporary namespace
> > TODO updated to remove mention of temporary views.
>
> That's *clearly* backwards. Ignoring our little argument, I think there
> is no d
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> so, added to TODO:
> * Have views on temporary tables exist in the temporary namespace
> TODO updated to remove mention of temporary views.
That's *clearly* backwards. Ignoring our little argument, I think there
is no denying that temp views as such
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > SQL99 is pretty clear about temporary tables, at least.
>
> It is ... and in fact the spec's notion of a temp table has nearly
> nothing to do with ours. They contemplate a temp table as an abstract
> table schema, if you will, that
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> SQL99 is pretty clear about temporary tables, at least.
It is ... and in fact the spec's notion of a temp table has nearly
nothing to do with ours. They contemplate a temp table as an abstract
table schema, if you will, that gets instantiated locally wi
"Sander Steffann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Now I am thinking about it, referential integrity also behaves funny with
> temp tables. The following is allowed:
>> create temp table a (x int primary key);
>> create table b (y int references a(x));
It is?
regression=# create temp table a (x in
Gavin Sherry wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> >
> > You want to hear something funny? When I see the standards quoted, I
> > jump to the end to find out what the person says it really means. I
> > find reading those standards painful. I am glad others are reading
> > the
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> You want to hear something funny? When I see the standards quoted, I
> jump to the end to find out what the person says it really means. I
> find reading those standards painful. I am glad others are reading
> them.
HAH!
I did a degree in the hi
You want to hear something funny? When I see the standards quoted, I
jump to the end to find out what the person says it really means. I
find reading those standards painful. I am glad others are reading
them.
---
Gavin
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > My feeling is that either the view is temporary, fully, or it isn't. I
> > don't see having it in the public namespace _and_ removing it on session
> > exit as defensible.
>
> I disagree ... (and who said this
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 04:12, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Yes, I realize that, but when I create an index on a temp table, I can
> > create it even though someone else tries to do the same in another
> > session. If these views on temp tables go away on session
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My feeling is that either the view is temporary, fully, or it isn't. I
> don't see having it in the public namespace _and_ removing it on session
> exit as defensible.
I disagree ... (and who said this was necessarily the public namespace,
anyway? Per
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Yes, I realize that, but when I create an index on a temp table, I can
> > create it even though someone else tries to do the same in another
> > session. If these views on temp tables go away on session exit, and
> > can't be reliab
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, I realize that, but when I create an index on a temp table, I can
> create it even though someone else tries to do the same in another
> session. If these views on temp tables go away on session exit, and
> can't be reliably accessed by other users
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Does every other user see the view name
>
> If he looks in the schema where the view is created, sure --- it's no
> different from any other non-temp table or view.
>
> > ... on his temp table?
>
> Um, are you thinking that a view
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does every other user see the view name
If he looks in the schema where the view is created, sure --- it's no
different from any other non-temp table or view.
> ... on his temp table?
Um, are you thinking that a view V created to refer to user 1's tem
Tom Lane wrote:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It seems to be a broken view not security risk in 7.2.1
>
> The implementation of temp tables has changed completely in CVS tip,
> so experiments with 7.2 aren't very relevant. In CVS tip I believe
> you *could* read the contents of
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It seems to be a broken view not security risk in 7.2.1
The implementation of temp tables has changed completely in CVS tip,
so experiments with 7.2 aren't very relevant. In CVS tip I believe
you *could* read the contents of someone else's temp table,
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 21:50, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 20:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I can go either way on this.
> >
> > AFAICS "create temp view" would have some small advantage of keeping the
> > view's name out of possibly-public
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We may have broken views again when "alter table drop column" gets done
It is done, and we do not have broken views.
regression=# create table t (f1 int, f2 int, f3 int);
CREATE TABLE
regression=# create view v as select f1,f2 from t;
CREATE VIEW
regre
On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 00:10, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > > that TODO item was written before we had dependencies, and I think
> > > it's obsolete. Basically the point of the TODO was to avoid
> > > having broken views --- and we have solved that problem.
> >
> > We may have broken views again when "al
> > that TODO item was written before we had dependencies, and I think
> > it's obsolete. Basically the point of the TODO was to avoid
> > having broken views --- and we have solved that problem.
>
> We may have broken views again when "alter table drop column" gets done
Any view depending on a
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 20:43, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I can go either way on this.
>
> AFAICS "create temp view" would have some small advantage of keeping the
> view's name out of possibly-public permanent namespaces, so the step of
> just adding the TEMP o
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 12:22, Tom Lane wrote:
> Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I was playing with this a while back (when I had initially added CASCADE
> > to tables). I believe that in the event of a crash the temp tables are
> > not removed until their next use. This means that stal
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > What about indexes? Do indexes on temp tables exist in the temp
> > namespace?
>
> Yes, a fortiori: any index exists in its table's namespace. Seems
> pretty irrelevant to the point at hand, though.
Just checking. So the index ex
Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was playing with this a while back (when I had initially added CASCADE
> to tables). I believe that in the event of a crash the temp tables are
> not removed until their next use. This means that stale *real* items
> may litter the system but the temp t
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What about indexes? Do indexes on temp tables exist in the temp
> namespace?
Yes, a fortiori: any index exists in its table's namespace. Seems
pretty irrelevant to the point at hand, though.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I can go either way on this.
>
> AFAICS "create temp view" would have some small advantage of keeping the
> view's name out of possibly-public permanent namespaces, so the step of
> just adding the TEMP option to CREATE VIEW may be w
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I can go either way on this.
AFAICS "create temp view" would have some small advantage of keeping the
view's name out of possibly-public permanent namespaces, so the step of
just adding the TEMP option to CREATE VIEW may be worth doing. The
advantage i
Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 11:18, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > I'm thinking that temporary views should be pretty trivial to
> > > > implement.
> > >
> > > ... except not so trivial, per the rest of your note.
> > >
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 11:18, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I'm thinking that temporary views should be pretty trivial to
> > > implement.
> >
> > ... except not so trivial, per the rest of your note.
> >
> > Do we actually need any such
On Tue, 2002-08-13 at 11:11, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm thinking that temporary views should be pretty trivial to
> > implement.
>
> ... except not so trivial, per the rest of your note.
>
> Do we actually need any such feature? Views on temp tables alrea
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'm thinking that temporary views should be pretty trivial to
> > implement.
>
> ... except not so trivial, per the rest of your note.
>
> Do we actually need any such feature? Views on temp tables already work
> correctly in CVS ti
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm thinking that temporary views should be pretty trivial to
> implement.
... except not so trivial, per the rest of your note.
Do we actually need any such feature? Views on temp tables already work
correctly in CVS tip: the implicit DROP CASCADE on
Gavin Sherry wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm thinking that temporary views should be pretty trivial to
> implement.
>
> * Allow temporary views
>
> This should be as simple as modifying gram.y (to set
> ViewStmt->view->istemp) and some logic in RemoveTempRelations() to remove
> the view's rule
Yep, p
36 matches
Mail list logo
