Re: global temporary tables

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: global temporary tables
Date: 2010-04-24 17:31:23
Message-ID: 9319.1272130283@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> At least AIUI, the use case for this feature is that you want to avoid
> creating "the same" temporary table over and over again.

The context that I've seen it come up in is that people don't want to
clutter their functions with create-it-if-it-doesn't-exist logic,
which you have to have given the current behavior of temp tables.
Any performance gain from reduced catalog churn would be gravy.

Aside from the DROP problem, I think this implementation proposal
has one other big shortcoming: what are you going to do about
table statistics? In many cases, you really *have* to do an ANALYZE
once you've populated a temp table, if you want to get decent plans
for it. Where will you put those stats?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-04-24 17:38:46 Re: global temporary tables
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-04-24 17:16:20 Re: global temporary tables