Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 8 June 2012 18:26, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I would be more open to warning people about CREATE GLOBAL TEMP >> TABLE - frankly, it's pretty wonky that we allow that but treat >> GLOBAL as a noise word in this first place. But I'm a little >> disinclined to have the message speculate about what might happen >> in future versions of PostgreSQL. Such predictions don't have a >> very good track record of being accurate. > > Agreed. > > We should make use of GLOBAL throw an ERROR: feature not yet > implemented, in preparation for what might one day happen. We > don't know the future but we do know the present. +1 It has always bothered me that we support GLOBAL there without coming anywhere near matching the semantics of GTTs. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
