Re: Materialized views WIP patch

"Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com> writes:
> An ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW option was my first thought on syntax to
> do what LOAD does in the current patch. But it bothered me that I
> couldn't think of any other cases where ALTER <some-object-type>
> only changed the data contained within the object and had no other
> impact. Are you both really comfortable with an ALTER MATERIALIZED
> VIEW which has no effect other than to update the data? It seems
> wrong to me.

I think you can already do that with some clever use of alter table ...
type using, or alter table set default.

> Sure -- a CONCURRENTLY option for LMV (or AMVU) seems like one of
> the next steps. I'll feel more confident about implementing that
> when it appears that we have shaken the last bugs out of
> CREATE/DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY, since anything which affects those
> statements will probably also matter here.

Sure.

Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support