| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: global temporary tables |
| Date: | 2010-04-25 02:57:01 |
| Message-ID: | u2h603c8f071004241957xb93a989ct5c78ff8e0f15c47b@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Oh, maybe I do see. If we pass it to smgropen() and stash it in the
>> SMgrRelation, we don't have to keep supplying it later on, maybe?
>
> Right. I'm unsure whether we should push it into the RelFileNode
> struct itself, but even having it in SMgrRelation ought to cut out
> a few places where it now has to be passed separately.
Pushing it into the RelFileNode has some advantages in terms of being
able to get at the information from everywhere, but one thing that
makes me think that's probably not a good decision is that we somtimes
WAL-log relfilenodes. And WAL-logging the value of the isTemp flag is
a waste, because if we're WAL-logging, it's zero.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-04-25 03:02:42 | Re: global temporary tables |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-25 02:49:14 | Re: Order of pg_stat_activity timestamp columns |