Re: PROPOSAL: Fast temporary tables
От | Atri Sharma |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PROPOSAL: Fast temporary tables |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAOeZVifFV0whSjAi5D9JeZCSg6O1UiFEkk7zpnhpD8YAJUd=8w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PROPOSAL: Fast temporary tables (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PROPOSAL: Fast temporary tables
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Aleksander Alekseev <a.alekseev@postgrespro.ru> writes:
>> There are applications that create and delete a lot of temporary
>> tables. Currently PostgreSQL doesn't handle such a use case well.
Yeah, I have a really hard time believing this can ever work. There
are MANY catalog tables potentially involved here - pg_class,
pg_attribute, pg_attrdef, pg_description, pg_trigger, ... and loads
more - and they all can have OID references to each other. If you
create a bunch of fake relcache and syscache entries, you're going to
need to give them OIDs, but where will those OIDs come from? What
guarantees that they aren't in use, or won't be used later while your
temporary object still exists? I think making this work would make
parallel query look like a minor feature.
Fair point, that means inventing a whole new OID generation structure..
Regards,
Atri
l'apprenant
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: