On Wed, February 20, 2013 16:28, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>> I suppose one should be able to expect that if one finds a view
>> in the information schema, then one should be able to use DROP
>> VIEW to remove it. Which in this case wouldn't work. So I don't
>> think including a materialized view under views or tables is
>> appropriate.
>
> Right. I think adding pg_matviews covers the stated use-case
> enough to answer Erik's concern.
Absolutely - I agree pg_matviews is much better than adding deviating information_schema stuff.
Thank you,
Erik Rijkers
