2012/11/27 David Johnston <pol...@yahoo.com>: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers- >> ow...@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Dimitri Fontaine >> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 10:03 AM >> To: Kevin Grittner >> Cc: Pavel Stehule; Peter Eisentraut; Pgsql Hackers >> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Materialized views WIP patch >> >> "Kevin Grittner" <kgri...@mail.com> writes: >> > changing the structure of the table. Somehow I don't find that >> > pursuasive as an argument for what ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW should >> > rescan the source relations and build a whole new set of data for >> > exactly the same MV definition. >> >> Fair enough. >> >> > Consider that in relational theory a table is considered a relation >> > variable. ALTER is supposed to change the definition of the variable >> > in some way. Other statements are used to change the value contained >> > in the variable. Sure there are some grey areas already, but I don't >> > see where we need to muddy the waters in this case. >> >> Under that light, using ALTER is strange indeed. I still don't like using > LOAD >> that much, allow me to try a last syntax proposal. Well all I can find > just now >> would be: >> >> UPDATE MATERIALIZED VIEW mv FOR EACH ROW; >> UPDATE MATERIALIZED VIEW mv FOR EACH STATEMENT [ CONCURRENTLY ]; >> >> The only value of such a proposal is that it's not LOAD and it's still not >> introducing any new keyword. Oh it's also avoiding to overload the >> SNAPSHOT keyword. Well, it still does not look like the best candidate. >> >> Regards, > > Just a thought but how about something like: > > DO REFRESH OF MATERIALIZED VIEW mat_view; > > In effect we begin overloading the meaning of "DO" to not only mean > anonymous code blocks but to also call pre-defined internal routines that > can be executed without having to use function-call syntax. "MATERIALIZED > VIEW" can be more generic "e.g., TABLE" if the need arises, the REFRESH > "Action" is generic, and additional clauses can be added after the object > name (FOR, CONCURRENTLY, WHERE, etc...)
-1 I unlike using keywords DO for this purpose - when we use it for anonymous blocks Regards Pavel > > David J. > > > > > > > > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
