2013/3/5 Kevin Grittner <kgri...@ymail.com>: > Exactly. I predict that we will eventually have some special sort > of trigger for maintaining MVs based on base table changes to > handle the ones that are just too expensive (in developer time or > run time) to fully automate. But there is a lot of low-hanging > fruit for automation.
I think it would be totally OK to restrict the possible definitions for matviews that can be maintained fully incrementally to something like: SELECT attributes and aggregations FROM trivial joins WHERE trivial condition GROUP BY attributes; Those definitions are the most useful for optimizing the things that matviews are good at (joins and aggregation). Nicolas PS. Sorry for having fired off this discussion that obviously doesn’t really relate to the current patch. -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion. Q. Why is top posting bad? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
