On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Martijn van Oosterhout
<kleptog@svana.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 02:52:01PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Well, temp tables really want a separate set of XIDs with a separate
>> CLOG, too. Admittedly, they don't necessarily need WAL, if you can
>> make them work without catalog entries, but that's not so easy either.
>
> At one point there was the idea to have a sort of permanent temporary
> tables which would have a pg_class entry but each session would have
> its own copy. Replicated slaves would then also be able to use this
> construction.
>
> Doesn't help with the XIDs though.
Hmm... yeah, I think I was the one who proposed that, actually. :-)
The trick is that it would require us to have two pg_class tables, two
pg_attribute tables, two pg_attrdef tables, etc.: in each case, one
permanent and one temporary. I am not sure how complex that will turn
out to be.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
