Re: R: Partitioned "views"

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Job <Job(at)colliniconsulting(dot)it>
Cc: "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: R: Partitioned "views"
Date: 2017-01-22 21:37:51
Message-ID: 20170122213751.GL18360@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Greetings,

* Job (Job(at)colliniconsulting(dot)it) wrote:
> >>The mat view takes longer and longer to update because it runs the full query. What you really want to do is have a side-table that you update regularly with appropriate SQL to issue UPDATE statements for just the current day (or whatever).
>
> If correct, i leave only last datas into "side-table" and syncronize only these datas in the materialized view.
> If i delete datas from the side-table (ex- truncate) during the next materialized view update they will be lost or remain intact?

I was suggesting that you, essentially, write your own SQL to have a
materialized view, *not* use the PG materialized view system.

In other words, the 'side-table' that you create would be *your*
materialized view, but to PG, it'd just look like a regular table.

You can't modify a PG materialized view.

Thanks!

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Shchapov 2017-01-23 11:32:31 Detailed progress reporting for "vacuuming indexes" stage
Previous Message Job 2017-01-22 21:29:44 R: Partitioned "views"