Re: Vacuuming leaked temp tables (once again)

Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> The only solution proposed in that thread was to auto-delete temp
>> tables at postmaster restart; which I opposed on the grounds that
>> throwing away data right after a crash was a terrible idea from a
>> forensic standpoint.

> Why not just rename the files out of the way, and nuke the entries from
> the catalog?

It's usually tough to make any sense of the contents of a table if you
don't have the catalog entries.  Anyway, that approach would put the
onus on the admin to clean things up eventually, which isn't all that
appealing.

Bear in mind that temp table contents are subject to summary deletion
during normal operation anyway.  What I opposed back in January was
deleting them *immediately* after a crash, but that doesn't mean I'm
in favor of keeping them indefinitely.
        regards, tom lane