On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Aleksander Alekseev > <a.aleks...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> Frankly I have much more faith in Tom's idea of using virtual part of the >> catalog for all temporary tables, i.e turning all temporary tables into >> "fast" temporary tables. Instead of introducing a new type of temporary >> tables >> that solve catalog bloating problem and forcing users to rewrite applications >> why not just not to create a problem in a first place? > > Would applications really need to be rewritten? Are they really > constructing temporary tables where the definition of the table is > dynamic, not just the content?
Mine is. But it wouldn't be a big deal to adapt. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
