Tom Lane wrote:
> Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> writes:
> > Carl R. Brune wrote:
> >> I should have added that I want to make further use of the
> >> temporary table after the COMMIT -- the rollback approach you
> >> propose makes it go away.
> >
> > In which case the transaction isn't READONLY.
>
> It does seem a bit inconsistent that we allow you to write into a
> temp table during a "READONLY" transaction, but not to create/drop
> one. I'm not excited about changing it though, as the tests to see if
> the command is allowed would become vastly more complex.
Temporary tables in the SQL standard are permanent objects, which is why
creating or dropping them is a durable operation and not allowed in
read-only transactions. It would probably make sense to allow creating
or dropping PostgreSQL-style temporary tables, though.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
