Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> That being the case, lumping them as being the "same" operation
>> feels like the wrong thing, and so we should choose a different
>> name for the MV operation.
> There is currently no truncation of MV data without rendering the
> MV unscannable.� Do you still feel it needs a different command
> name?
You didn't say anything that changed my opinion: it doesn't feel like
a TRUNCATE to me. It's not changing the object to a different but
entirely valid state, which is what TRUNCATE does.
Peter claimed upthread that REFRESH is a subcommand of ALTER MATERIALIZE
VIEW and that this operation should be another one. That sounds pretty
reasonable from here.
regards, tom lane
