On Wed, February 20, 2013 16:28, Kevin Grittner wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@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 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
