Re: Why no CREATE TEMP MATERIALIZED VIEW ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Ron
Subject Re: Why no CREATE TEMP MATERIALIZED VIEW ?
Date
Msg-id 61406744-6096-47b3-1fcd-329b5cfd26b7@gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why no CREATE TEMP MATERIALIZED VIEW ?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Why no CREATE TEMP MATERIALIZED VIEW ?  (Adam Brusselback <adambrusselback@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On 7/16/19 11:56 AM, David G. Johnston wrote:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 9:29 AM Ivan Voras <ivoras@gmail.com> wrote:
Out of curiosity, since there's CREATE TEMP VIEW, any particular reason there's no CREATE TEMP MATERIALIZED VIEW?

Seems like it could be similar to a temp table.

Probably a lack (absence) of use cases resulted in people deciding (or defaulting) to not spend any effort in that area.  Incremental maintenance and refresh seem considerably less useful when only the current session can see the table.  Temp views and temp tables seem to provide sufficient options in the session lifetime space.

How different is a "temp materialized view" from a regular view?


--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Why no CREATE TEMP MATERIALIZED VIEW ?
Next
From: Adam Brusselback
Date:
Subject: Re: Why no CREATE TEMP MATERIALIZED VIEW ?