Subject Re: [Firebird-Architect] Counter proposal to Temporary tables
Author Aage Johansen
Ann W. Harrison wrote:
> Given that we've largely agreed
> ...
> why do we need temporary tables at all? Why not use
> a conventional table with fields defined to contain
> the connection identifier and the current date? Those
> two fields can be filled in with triggers. Create a
> view that excludes the connection and date and filters
> on the connection, and you've got a temporary table,
> lacking only cleanup. Use a simple procedure that
> filters on the date field from time to time to remove
> data more than two weeks old.
> Not perfect, certainly, but free, and doesn't involve
> mucking with internals at all.

With "conventional table" one will need well-behaved clients who won't
read/change or otherwise muck around in data that doesn't belong to them.

Aage J.