Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I can go either way on this. > > AFAICS "create temp view" would have some small advantage of keeping the > view's name out of possibly-public permanent namespaces, so the step of > just adding the TEMP option to CREATE VIEW may be worth doing. The > advantage isn't very big but neither is the amount of work.
What about indexes? Do indexes on temp tables exist in the temp namespace? I would think they should by default, as well as views based on temp tables. Certainly no one else should be able to see the temp index/views. > Trying to prohibit non-temp views on temp tables strikes me as more work > than it's worth; that TODO item was written before we had dependencies, > and I think it's obsolete. Basically the point of the TODO was to avoid > having broken views --- and we have solved that problem. Yes, if it auto-temps because it is based on a temp object, that is fine by me. However, based on your comments above, I think it should auto-temp fully, rather than just auto-destroy. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
