Re: [Patch] Temporary tables that do not bloat pg_catalog (a.k.a fast temp tables)

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2016-08-07 14:46:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>>> I think the whole idea of a fast temporary table is that there are no
>>> catalog entries.  If there are no catalog entries, then dependencies
>>> are not visible.  If there ARE catalog entries, to what do they refer?
>>> Without a pg_class entry for the table, there's no table OID upon
>>> which to depend.

>> TBH, I think that the chances of such a design getting committed are
>> not distinguishable from zero.  Tables have to have OIDs; there is just
>> too much code that assumes that.  And I seriously doubt that it will
>> work (for any large value of "work") without catalog entries.

> That seems a bit too defeatist.

Huh?  I didn't say we shouldn't work on the problem --- I just think that
this particular approach isn't good.  Which you seemed to agree with.
        regards, tom lane