| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | morrisdeoryx(at)gmail(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Incremental aggregate/rollup strategy advice |
| Date: | 2019-07-08 14:04:38 |
| Message-ID: | 20190708.230438.2075482057094922110.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Thank you for your response, I have followed the discussion on Hackers with
> interest. I hope that your efforts are a great success! In my case, I need
> to find a solution available in shipping versions of Postgres. But, since
> you've joined in, I'm curious: What is the advantage of a materialized view
> over a real table? It seems like the update semantics and mechanics are
> more straightforward with a table.
In my understanding, views and materialized views provide users more
flexible and easy way to access base tables. In RDB, base tables are
usually heavily normalized and may not be easy for applications to
extract information. By defining views, apps would have convenient and
intuitive way to get information from base tables.
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2019-07-08 14:23:34 | Re: Measuring the Query Optimizer Effect: Turning off the QO? |
| Previous Message | Morris de Oryx | 2019-07-08 13:34:03 | Re: Incremental aggregate/rollup strategy advice |