On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> Unfortunately, I don't see much alternative to making smgr know
>> something about the temp-ness of the relation, though I'm hoping to
>> keep the smgr surgery to an absolute minimum. Maybe what we could do
>> is incorporate the backend ID or PID into the file name when the
>> relation is temp. Then we could scan for and nuke such files pretty
>> easily. Otherwise I can't really think how to make it work.
>
> I think that could be a really good idea, mainly because it makes
> post-crash cleanup MUCH safer: you can tell with certainty from the
> filename that it's a leftover temp table. The notion of zapping files
> just because we don't see them listed in pg_class has always scared the
> heck out of me.
>
> We already know temp-ness at pretty low levels, like bufmgr vs localbuf.
> Pushing it all the way down to smgr doesn't seem like a leap; in fact
> I think it would eliminate a separate isTemp parameter in a lot of places.
Eh? I don't see how it's going to do that.
...Robert
