Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2016-08-07 14:46:06 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> I think the whole idea of a fast temporary table is that there are no
>>> catalog entries. If there are no catalog entries, then dependencies
>>> are not visible. If there ARE catalog entries, to what do they refer?
>>> Without a pg_class entry for the table, there's no table OID upon
>>> which to depend.
>> TBH, I think that the chances of such a design getting committed are
>> not distinguishable from zero. Tables have to have OIDs; there is just
>> too much code that assumes that. And I seriously doubt that it will
>> work (for any large value of "work") without catalog entries.
> That seems a bit too defeatist.
Huh? I didn't say we shouldn't work on the problem --- I just think that
this particular approach isn't good. Which you seemed to agree with.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
