Re: shared temp tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: shared temp tables
Date
Msg-id 200106210223.f5L2N7H02522@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to shared temp tables  (mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> I love the fact that temp tables do not exist in every PostgreSQL session,
> don't get me wrong. 
> 
> The issue is this: most "web environments" have the idea of a session. A
> session management scheme based on PostgreSQL exposes PostgreSQL's worst
> behavior. Small amount of records, high update/delete rate for each record. So
> much so, that it probably isn't realistic to replace something like Oracle with
> PostgreSQL in this environment.
> 
> Do "temp tables" suffer the same delete/update behavior of marking the row as
> deleted and adding another row? Thus requiring vacuum periodically. 
> 
> If not, should/could there be a way to create a temp table that is globally
> visible?

Temp table are the same as real tables have have the same update
behavior.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
Subject: RE: Setuid functions
Next
From: "Ross J. Reedstrom"
Date:
Subject: Re: Setuid functions