Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 11:29:39 +0900
Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 11:09:16 -0400
> Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > This patch has bitrotted due to some other patch affecting trigger.c.
> > 
> > Could you post a rebase?
> > 
> > This is the last week of the CF before feature freeze so time is of the essence.
> 
> I attached a rebased patch-set.
> 
> Also, I made the folowing changes from the previous.
> 
> 1. Fix to not use a new deptye
> 
> In the previous patch, we introduced a new deptye 'm' into pg_depend.
> This deptype was used for looking for IVM triggers to be removed at
> REFRESH WITH NO DATA. However, we decided to not use it for reducing
> unnecessary change in the core code. Currently, the trigger name and
> dependent objclass are used at that time instead of it.
> 
> As a result, the number of patches are reduced to nine from ten.


> 2. Bump the version numbers in psql and pg_dump
> 
> This feature's target is PG 16 now.

Sorry, I revert this change. It was too early to bump up the
version number.

-- 
Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>