> > Uh, this also requires serialization and deserialization of non- > > finalized transition state, no? > > For that sort of optimization to incremental maintenance of > materialized views (when we get there), yes. That will be one of > many issues to sort out. Any reason you're focusing on that now? > Do you think we need to settle on a format for that to proceed with > the work David is discussing?
No, it's just that it wasn't on David's list.
That's this part, right?
I wrote:
"which I believe will need to be modified to implement complex database types to backup our internal aggregate state types so that these types be properly passed between executor nodes, between worker processes and perhaps foreign data wrappers (maybe just postgres_fdw I've not looked into this yet)"
