On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Seref Arikan <serefarikan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Also I need those tables per session, so creating and dropping with TEMP >> > tables appear to be faster. >> >> Performance of creating tables is going to be storage bound. what are >> your performance requirements? Even if the temp table itself is moved >> to ramdisk you have catalog updating. Usually from performance >> standpoint, creation of temp tables is not interesting -- but there >> are exceptions. If you need extremely fast creation/drop of tempe >> tables, you probably need to reorganize into permanent table with >> session local records using various tricks. > > > I am very interested in what you've written in the last sentence above, > since it is exactly what my requirement is. Could you explain that a bit > more? Well, first, *) is your temporary data session or transaction local (transaction meaning for duration of function call or till 'commit'). *) if 'transaction' above, what version postgres? if 9.1+ let's explore use of wcte *) what are your performance requirements in detail *) are all sessions using same general structure of temp table(s)? merlin -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
