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

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Materialized views WIP patch
Date
Msg-id 5133EA56.2050103@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Materialized views WIP patch  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Materialized views WIP patch  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: Materialized views WIP patch  (Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> There's a much more fundamental reason why this will never happen, which
> is that the query planner is not licensed to decide that you only want
> an approximate and not an exact answer to your query.

I think it would be worth talking about when someone wants to implement
it.  I'd imagine it would require setting a GUC, though, which would be
off by default for obvious reasosn.

> If MVs were guaranteed always up-to-date, maybe we could think about
> automatic use of them --- but that's a far different feature from what
> Kevin has here.

And of limited utility, as mentioned.


-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: CREATE RULE "_RETURN" and toast tables
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: is it bug? - printing boolean domains in sql/xml function