Re: Materialized views WIP patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Materialized views WIP patch
Date
Msg-id 1353976503.4992.10.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Materialized views WIP patch  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: Materialized views WIP patch  ("David Rowley" <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Re: Materialized views WIP patch  (Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri@2ndQuadrant.fr>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 09:46 -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 11/14/12 9:28 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > 17. Since the data viewed in an MV is not up-to-date with the latest
> >     committed transaction,
> 
> So, the way I understand it, in Oracle terms, this feature is a
> "snapshot", not a materialized view.  Maybe that's what it should be
> called then.

OK, I take everything back and claim the opposite.

In current Oracle, SNAPSHOT is an obsolete alias for MATERIALIZED VIEW.
Materialized views have the option of REFRESH ON DEMAND and REFRESH ON
COMMIT, with the former being the default.  So it seems that the syntax
of what you are proposing is in line with Oracle.

I'm not fond of overloading LOAD as the refresh command.  Maybe you
could go the Oracle route here as well and use a stored procedure.  That
would also allow things like SELECT pg_refresh_mv(oid) FROM ... more
easily.





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables
Next
From: Josh Kupershmidt
Date:
Subject: Re: Suggestion for --truncate-tables to pg_restore