On Fri, 14 Jun 2002, Mike Mascari wrote:
> That is what I want to do, except by extending the grammar. I must admit
> to actually being surprised that a TEMP table created inside a
> transaction lived after the transaction completed. That's when I looked
> at the standard and saw that PostgreSQL's implementation was correct. I
> would think for most people session-long temp tables are more the
> exception than the rule. But I guess SQL92 doesn't think so. Regardless,
> a couple of other people have shown some interest in the idea. I'll post
> it to general as well as Tom suggests...
>
Actually, we needed to use temp tables that live beyond the transaction,
because there are no session variables in postgres. So I did an
implementation that used temp tables instead.
Having the temp table not live for the life of the session would be a big
problem for me.
-rocco
