Re: [HACKERS] temporary table vs array performance - Mailing list pgsql-general

From David G. Johnston
Subject Re: [HACKERS] temporary table vs array performance
Date
Msg-id CAKFQuwbCm+exABos=jKGMOzm85CDWzsgVd-AcCPkx80dBte=TA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to temporary table vs array performance  ("dbyzaa@163.com" <dbyzaa@163.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:18 AM, 邓彪 <dbyzaa@163.com> wrote:
we have to do dml in temp table,the CTE is not fit

 
​Moving this to -general only...​

​Please direct all replies to the list.

You are asking for help but not providing any context for what your requirements are.  You are not likely to get good help.

Best case, supply a working function (self contained test case) that does exactly what you need it to do but uses a temporary table and performs badly.  Lacking that at least attempt to describe your problem and not just point out that creating temporary tables is expensive.

David J.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] temporary table vs array performance
Next
From: Márcio A. Sepp
Date:
Subject: RES: Chante domain type - Postgres 9.2