Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> I am thinking about global temp tables.
>>
>
> These would have some value to us.
>
> In case anyone doesn't know, this is a feature in the SQL standard.
> You have a permanent definition of the schema, but the table is
> materialized as a temporary table on reference by any connection.
>
> I can't speak to the practicality of the proposed implementation
> techniques.
>
>
>
Using a global table to achieve schema-persistent temp tables seems like
a horrid hack - what would you do if the table used a type other than a
standard built-in type?
Or perhaps Pavel doesn't really mean "global" as the term is used in
Postgres (c.f. the pg_database table)?
cheers
andrew