Kevin,
> The reason was that the start of CF4 was deemed too late in the
> development cycle to be trying to design what that should look
> like. No sooner had you suggested that one column than someone
> suggested two others which might also be useful, and it seemed to
Yeah, I'm just pointing out that we *already had* this discussion, so
there isn't any point in having it again.
> That was deemed to be incompatible with unlogged matviews, which
> some didn't want to give up in this initial release.
Huh? Unlogged tables don't go in pg_class?
> Basically, what this patch aims at is more or less what some other
> databases had in their initial releases of materialized views 10 to
> 20 years ago. Other products have built on those foundations with
> each major release. I was hoping we could do the same. We are not
> going to reach parity on this with any other major database product
> in one release, or probably even two or three.
Yep.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
