On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 08:43:46PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 11:35:34AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote: > > I can say that I've seen plenty of instances where the ability to create > > temporary tables very quickly with no overhead over the original query would > > be useful. > > I wonder if this requires what the standard refers to as a global > temporary table. As I read it (which may be wrong, I find the language > obtuse), a global temporary table is a temporary table whose structure > is predefined. So, you'd define it once, updating the catalog only once > but still get a table that is emptied each startup. > > Ofcourse, it may not be what the standard means, but it still seems > like a useful idea, to cut down on schema bloat.
IIRC that's the exact syntax Oracle uses: CREATE GLOBAL TEMPORARY TABLE ... I always found it a bit odd, since it always seemed to me like a global temporary table would be one that every backend could read... something akin to a real table that doesn't worry about fsync or any of that (and is potentially not backed on disk at all). -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
