Re: Global temporary tables
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2026-06-22T13:43:00Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> On Jun 22, 2026, at 4:57 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rasheed@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 at 23:06, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: >> >> Wow, we're on the same track. I have a patch series for exactly this >> feature that I was about to submit. >> >> FTR here's where I'm at. I'll try to take a look at yours ASAP. > > Oh, wow. There's a lot of similarity between our patchsets, which is > reassuring, but there are also a number of differences, which I need > to think about in more detail. Yeah, agree on both fronts. The main areas I see are the catalog and handling wraparound. I don’t think there’s necessarily a clear winner on either, so I’ll be interested to hear what others say. Cheers Andrew
Commits
-
doc: clarify MERGE PARTITIONS adjacency requirement
- 57f19774d6c8 master cited