Re: Commitfest 2021-11 Patch Triage - Part 1
От | Yugo NAGATA |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Commitfest 2021-11 Patch Triage - Part 1 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20211201160656.d610182dabfef4245e0c4066@sraoss.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Commitfest 2021-11 Patch Triage - Part 1 (Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>) |
Ответы |
Re: Commitfest 2021-11 Patch Triage - Part 1
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 09:03:06 -0300 Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br> wrote: > > > > > 2138: Incremental Materialized View Maintenance > > > > I've responded to it in the following thread, and described the recent > > discussions, > > current status, summary of IVM feature and design, and past discussions. > > > > IVM is a wonderful feature, but some features were omitted because of > its complexity, so maybe IVM will spend more time to completely solve what > it wants to do. > I did not understand, and didn´t find on docs, if a Materialized View is a > table, why I cannot change a specific record ? > Because if I have a way to create and refresh the entire view and update a > single record it would give me all power of IVM is trying to. I think the reason why we can't update a materialized view directly is because it is basically a "view" and it should not contains any data irrelevant to its definition and underlying tables. If we would have a feature to update a materialized view direcly, maybe, it should behave as updatable-view as well as normal (virtual) views, although I am not sure.... -- Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: