Re: [HACKERS] mat views stats - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Mlodgenski
Subject Re: [HACKERS] mat views stats
Date
Msg-id CAB_5SRdq9=P0OOPwg3HxLb+SK8F6B8fgM-qqkzNVwCL-m2KkyQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] mat views stats  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] mat views stats  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:20 AM, Jim Mlodgenski <jimmy76@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Certainly easier, but I don't think it'd be better. Matviews really
>> > aren't
>> > the same thing as tables. Off-hand (without reviewing the patch), update
>> > and
>> > delete counts certainly wouldn't make any sense. "Insert" counts might,
>> > in
>> > as much as it's how many rows have been added by refreshes. You'd want a
>> > refresh count too.
>>
>> Regular REFRESH truncates the view and repopulates it, but REFRESH
>> CONCURRENTLY does inserts, updates, and deletes as needed to adjust
>> the contrs that make sense for
>> regular tables are also sensible here.
>>
>
> After digging into things further, just making refresh report the stats for
> what is it basically doing simplifies and solves it and it is something we
> can back patch if that the consensus. See the attached patch.

This is unhappy:
$ git diff master --check
src/backend/commands/matview.c:155: indent with spaces.
+        uint64          processed = 0;

+                /*
+                 * Send the stats to mimic what we are essentially doing.
+                 * A truncate and insert
+                 */
This sentence is unfinished.

There is also no need to report the number of inserts if WITH NO DATA is used.


Here is the cleaned up patch

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Cost model for parallel CREATE INDEX
Next
From: Masahiko Sawada
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum WIP