Re: Materialized views WIP patch

From: "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Materialized views WIP patch
Date: 2012-11-19 21:17:21
Message-ID: 20121119211721.156380@gmx.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> writes:
>> Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> What use would a temporary matview be?
>
>> It would be essentially like a temporary table, with all the same
>> persistence options. I'm not really sure how often it will be more
>> useful than a temporary table before we have incremental
>> maintenance of materialized views; once we have that, though, it
>> seems likely that there could be reasonable use cases.
>
> One of the principal attributes of a temp table is that its
> contents aren't (reliably) accessible from anywhere except the
> owning backend. Not sure where you're going to hide the incremental
> maintenance in that scenario.

The more I think about that, the less sensible temporary MVs seem.
Unless I can figure out some reasonable use case, I'll diable that in
the next version of the patch.

-Kevin

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-11-19 21:25:27 Re: [v9.3] Extra Daemons (Re: elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a database)
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2012-11-19 21:17:01 Re: [v9.3] Extra Daemons (Re: elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a database)