Re: [Fwd: Re: Transactions and temp tables]

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> IMHO, this is just getting too kludgey. We came up with pretty good 
>> ideas on how to handle temp tables properly, by treating the same as 
>> non-temp tables. That should eliminate all the problems the latest patch 
>> did, and also the issues with sequences, and allow all access to temp 
>> tables, not just a limited subset. I don't think it's worthwhile to 
>> apply the kludge as a stopgap measure, let's do it properly in 8.5.
>> ...
> 
> Can someone tell me how this should be worded as a TODO item?

There already is a todo item about this:

"Allow prepared transactions with temporary tables created and dropped 
in the same transaction, and when an ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS temporary 
table is accessed "

I added a link to the email describing the most recent idea on how this 
should be implemented.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com