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

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables
Date
Msg-id CAFj8pRADaF0eAg4-3RZhLxz_+zaKLQe5gFPGoqRdSFByvhmxEw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables  ("曾文旌(义从)" <wenjing.zwj@alibaba-inc.com>)
Responses Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables
Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables
List pgsql-hackers


ne 16. 2. 2020 v 16:15 odesílatel 曾文旌(义从) <wenjing.zwj@alibaba-inc.com> napsal:


2020年2月15日 下午6:06,Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> 写道:


postgres=# insert into foo select generate_series(1,10000);
INSERT 0 10000
postgres=# \dt+ foo
                          List of relations
┌────────┬──────┬───────┬───────┬─────────────┬────────┬─────────────┐
│ Schema │ Name │ Type  │ Owner │ Persistence │  Size  │ Description │
╞════════╪══════╪═══════╪═══════╪═════════════╪════════╪═════════════╡
│ public │ foo  │ table │ pavel │ session     │ 384 kB │             │
└────────┴──────┴───────┴───────┴─────────────┴────────┴─────────────┘
(1 row)

postgres=# truncate foo;
TRUNCATE TABLE
postgres=# \dt+ foo
                          List of relations
┌────────┬──────┬───────┬───────┬─────────────┬───────┬─────────────┐
│ Schema │ Name │ Type  │ Owner │ Persistence │ Size  │ Description │
╞════════╪══════╪═══════╪═══════╪═════════════╪═══════╪═════════════╡
│ public │ foo  │ table │ pavel │ session     │ 16 kB │             │
└────────┴──────┴───────┴───────┴─────────────┴───────┴─────────────┘
(1 row)

I expect zero size after truncate.
Thanks for review.

I can explain, I don't think it's a bug.
The current implementation of the truncated GTT retains two blocks of FSM pages.
The same is true for truncating regular tables in subtransactions.
This is an implementation that truncates the table without changing the relfilenode of the table.


This is not extra important feature - now this is little bit a surprise, because I was not under transaction.

Changing relfilenode, I think, is necessary, minimally for future VACUUM FULL support.
Not allowing relfilenode changes is the current limit.
I think can improve on it. But ,This is a bit complicated.
so I'd like to know the necessity of this improvement.
Could you give me more details?

I don't think so GTT without support of VACUUM FULL can be accepted. Just due consistency.

Regards

Pavel



Regards

Pavel Stehule
 

Wenjing


Regards

Pavel



Wenjing




>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "曾文旌(义从)"
Date:
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Global temporary tables
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: plan cache overhead on plpgsql expression