Tom Lane writes:
I should think there would be a notable performance advantage, since
one need not create a temp table (which in our current implementation is
just as expensive as creating a permanent table); not to mention
dropping the temp table later, vacuuming up the resulting dead rows
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane writes:
I should think there would be a notable performance advantage, since
one need not create a temp table (which in our current implementation is
just as expensive as creating a permanent table); not to mention
dropping the temp table later, vacuuming up
Tom Lane wrote:
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
We've rejected session variables many times before because they duplicate
temporary tables. I don't see anything new added by this proposal.
I should think there would be a notable performance advantage, since
one need not create
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Mike Mascari writes:
Out of sheer shame for a stupid remark, I have implemented a pgenv
contrib module which provides three functions:
set_session_variable (name, value)
get_session_variable (name)
reset_session_variables()
How is this better than temporary
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Mascari writes:
Well, I basically implemented it as a result of this thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2003-09/msg01347.php
We've rejected session variables many times before because they duplicate
temporary tables. I don't
