Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Yes, I realize that, but when I create an index on a temp table, I can > > create it even though someone else tries to do the same in another > > session. If these views on temp tables go away on session exit, and > > can't be reliably accessed by other users, they should be in the temp > > schema and therefore invisible to other users and to prevent name > > conflicts. > > I think we should provide the *facility* for temp views; that doesn't > equate to feeling that we must have an enforcement mechanism to prevent > you from using a non-temp view on a temp table. The enforcement > mechanism would be notably more work to write and would slow down the > creation of views (at least non-temp ones), in order to achieve what? > Not much that I can see. Admittedly, it's a bit silly to use a > non-temp view with a temp table, but I don't think the system needs to > go out of its way to prevent silliness.
My feeling is that either the view is temporary, fully, or it isn't. I don't see having it in the public namespace _and_ removing it on session exit as defensible. I would like to update the TODO list to say: Place views on temporary tables in temporary namespaces It may be difficult, but I clearly think it is a bug if we don't do it. -- 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 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org