| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Materialized views WIP patch |
| Date: | 2013-02-19 22:45:10 |
| Message-ID: | 51240076.3060108@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
> That I could probably do. Do you think they should have a separate
> pg_stat_user_matviews table, etc., or do you think it would be
> better to include them in with tables there?
Well, ideally pg_matviews would have matview definitions, and
pg_stat_matviews would have stats on matview usage and rows. But see
what you can get done; I imagine we'll overhaul it for 9.4 anyway once
we've had a chance to use the feature.
>
>> Also a \dM.
>
> I already added it as \dm in the current patch. Does that conflict
> with something else that's pending?
Oh, no, I thought \dm was *already* in use, but apparently not.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-02-19 22:47:24 | Re: Materialized views WIP patch |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-02-19 22:38:24 | Re: Materialized views WIP patch |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2013-02-19 22:47:24 | Re: Materialized views WIP patch |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2013-02-19 22:43:27 | Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system |