On 2014-09-22 15:46:48 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > On 9/18/14 7:40 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > > I fail to see why that is so much preferrable for you to passing > > parameter to DO? > > > > 1) You need to think about unique names for functions > > 2) Doesn't work on HOT STANDBYs > > 3) Causes noticeable amount of catalog bloat > > 4) Is about a magnitude or two more expensive > > Doesn't this apply to all temporary objects? It would also be great to > have temporary tables, temporary indexes, temporary triggers, temporary > extensions, etc. that don't have the above problems. I think inventing > a separate mechanism for working around each instance of this problem > would end up being very confusing.
Meh. Those aren't comparable. TEMPORARY TABLES/INDEXES/... all live beyond a single statement. What's being discussed here doesn't. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
