Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
> On 15 July 2015 at 16:28, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> I think that's generally a fair point. But here we're discussing to add
>> a fair amount of wrinkles with the copy approach. The fact alone that
>> the oid is different will have some ugly consequences.
> Why? We are creating a local temp table LIKE the global temp table. That is
> already a supported operation. So there is no "different oid".
You're presuming a specific implementation decision, one that has not been
made yet, and isn't all that attractive because of the catalog bloat issues.
regards, tom lane