Re: [HACKERS] temp table oddness?u

> OK, I think that set of issues is solved.  All the temp-table examples
> Tatsuo and I gave this morning work with the current sources, and I
> think shared invalidation of relcache entries is pretty solid too.
> 
> What we have at this point is a set of tightly interwoven changes in
> relcache.c, temprel.c, sinval.c, and the syscache stuff.  If we want to
> commit these changes into 6.5.*, it's all-or-nothing; I don't think we
> can extract just part of the changes.  I'm real hesitant to do that.
> These are good fixes, I believe, but I don't yet trust 'em enough to put
> into a stable release.  Can we live with the temp table misbehaviors as
> "known bugs" for 6.5.* ?

I have already cast my vote for leaving them out of 6.5.*.


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026