> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] CREATE TEMP TABLE ON COMMIT
>
>
> Bruce,
>
> I have a working patch for this I just need to test it further. It occured
> to me that there was a bug with the previous implementation in as much as
> it didn't handle situations wher
Bruce,
I have a working patch for this I just need to test it further. It occured
to me that there was a bug with the previous implementation in as much as
it didn't handle situations where the user dropped the temp table in a
transaction block. As such, I have added a flag to the structure marki
Gavin, how are you doing with this. As I remember, the only remaining
issue was where to store the 'drop on commit' information in the
backend. If that is all there is, we can come up with a solution.
---
Gavin Sherry wro
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ... I think I'll bite the bullet and store the ON COMMIT data in the
> > system catalogues per SQL99. Thoughts?
>
> Seems like the very hard way, considering that there's no reason at all
> for the ON COMMIT status to survive a given
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... I think I'll bite the bullet and store the ON COMMIT data in the
> system catalogues per SQL99. Thoughts?
Seems like the very hard way, considering that there's no reason at all
for the ON COMMIT status to survive a given backend run. I'd certainly
Gavin Sherry wrote:
> Bruce,
>
> I intend on addressing this by completely rewriting the patch. When I
> spoke to Tom and yourself about merging it with 7.3 at OSCON I argued that
> storing the ON COMMIT data in a global linked list was better (strictly
> for performance reasons). Given that I've
Bruce,
I intend on addressing this by completely rewriting the patch. When I
spoke to Tom and yourself about merging it with 7.3 at OSCON I argued that
storing the ON COMMIT data in a global linked list was better (strictly
for performance reasons). Given that I've incorrectly implemented DELETE
Gavin, was this addressed?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > As for your question (and, perhaps, SQL99) I don't seen how it makes any
> > sense to specify ON COMMIT outside of a transaction
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As for your question (and, perhaps, SQL99) I don't seen how it makes any
> sense to specify ON COMMIT outside of a transaction block.
Surely it does.
CREATE TEMP TABLE foo(...) ON COMMIT DELETE ROWS;
BEGIN;
insert some rows in f
On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > template1=# create temp table a (a int) on commit drop;
> > ERROR: You must be inside a transaction to use ON COMMIT
>
> Surely that's only for ON COMMIT DROP, if you intend to offer the
> others?
I should have
Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> template1=# create temp table a (a int) on commit drop;
> ERROR: You must be inside a transaction to use ON COMMIT
Surely that's only for ON COMMIT DROP, if you intend to offer the
others?
regards, tom lane
11 matches
Mail list logo
