Re: Temp table or normal table for performance? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jasen Betts
Subject Re: Temp table or normal table for performance?
Date
Msg-id h6jjte$ato$2@reversiblemaps.ath.cx
Whole thread Raw
In response to Temp table or normal table for performance?  (Stephen Cook <sclists@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Temp table or normal table for performance?
Re: Temp table or normal table for performance?
List pgsql-general
On 2009-08-19, Stephen Cook <sclists@gmail.com> wrote:

> Let's say I have a function that needs to collect some data from various
> tables and process and sort them to be returned to the user.

plpgsql functions don't play well with temp tables IME.
there are work-arounds and they are ugly. if you caus use a different
language it could work.

> In general, would it be better to create a temporary table in that
> function, do the work and sorting there, and return it... or keep a
> permanent table for pretty much the same thing, but add a "user session"
> field and return the relevant rows from that and then delete them?

> Sorry this is vague, I know it most likely depends on the workload and
> such, but I'm just putting this together now. I could go either way, and
> also switch it up in the future if necessary. Is there a rule of thumb
> on this one?  I'm a bit biased against temporary tables, but then again
> if the normal table gets a lot of action it might not be the optimal choice.

temp tables are usually worth the effort.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Jasen Betts
Date:
Subject: Re: PL/PGSQL: why IF test the whole condition before failing or not?
Next
From: Scott Marlowe
Date:
Subject: Re: ERROR: could not access file "$libdir/xxid": No such file or directory