Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZaHTH=q9eyyeBk3DYBmEmPQoc_oTafMxfeqoye+ioeZg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables  (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>)
Responses Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 3:29 PM Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
> I'm still hopeful we get to advance this early in 16 because I think
> everyone agrees the feature would be great.

I'm not saying this patch can't make progress, but I think the chances
of this being ready to commit any time in the v16 release cycle, let
alone at the beginning, are low. This patch set has been around since
2019, and here Andres and I are saying it's not even really reviewable
in the shape that it's in. I have done some review of it previously,
BTW, but eventually I gave up because it just didn't seem like we were
making any progress. And then a long time after that people were still
finding many server crashes with relatively simple test cases.

I agree that the feature is desirable, but I think getting there is
going to require a huge amount of effort that may amount to a total
rewrite of the patch.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: casting operand to proper type in BlockIdGetBlockNumber
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_stop_backup() v2 incorrectly marked as proretset