Re: [Fwd: Re: [GENERAL] temp schemas]

No, user error.

On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 7:53 PM, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim@gunduz.org> wrote:
>
> May be a TODO item here.
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
>> To: Roberts, Jon <Jon.Roberts@asurion.com>
>> Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
>> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] temp schemas
>> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:23:10 -0400
>>
>> "Roberts, Jon" <Jon.Roberts@asurion.com> writes:
>> > I am noticing a large number of temp schemas in my database.  We use
>> > temp tables but it doesn't appear that the schemas get dropped for some
>> > reason.
>>
>> That's intentional.  There doesn't seem a lot of value in dropping a
>> catalog entry that'll just have to be created again later.
>>
>> > This greatly slows down how long it takes pgAdmin to connect
>> > because it retrieves thousands of pg_temp_% schemas.
>>
>> Why have you got thousands of them?  If you are running with thousands
>> of active backends, may I suggest a connection pooler?
>>
>> (It might be a good idea to fix pgAdmin so it ignores other sessions'
>> temp schemas, though.)
>>
>>                       regards, tom lane
>>
> --
> Devrim GÜNDÜZ, RHCE
> devrim~gunduz.org, devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
>                   http://www.gunduz.org
>



--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com