2010/5/20 Pavel <baro...@seznam.cz>: > For this summer I have plan to make patch inplementing snapshot materialized > views (MV). I believe it will not be end of effort to implement more of MV. > But I / we need discuss MV syntax and exact behaviour so I have some > questions about that for all of you: > > a) relkind for materialized view in pg_class? > - I'm voting for char 'm' quite obvious why, but not sure about alias: > 1 - RELKIND_MVIEW > 2 - RELKIND_MATVIEW > or any other ideas?
I think the prior question is whether we need to create a new relkind at all. I'm prepared to believe that the answer is yes, but I'd like to see a clear justification of why we can't use either 'v' or 'r'. It seems to me that a materialized view is a lot like a regular old table with a special rewrite rule attached to it somewhere. > b) create MV syntax? > - CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW mvname AS ..., I think it is quite > obvious to do so, but I had to ask I think that's OK. > c) refresh command syntax? > 1 - ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW mvname REFRESH > or > 2 - REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW mvname 1. > d) what to do when someone use INSERT, UPDATE or DELETE against MV? > 1 - raise error? - I prefer this option > 2 - let commands change MV? (no chance to let changes propagate to > source tables, not for this summer :) > if pg lets user to DML against MV, I expect that triggers should work too 1. > e) what to do when someone drop table or column? > - it behave like it was a classic view. Fire error and hint > - CASCADE option will remove MV Agree. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers