Re: Feature: temporary materialized views

From: Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Mitar <mmitar(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Feature: temporary materialized views
Date: 2019-02-06 16:05:56
Message-ID: 25631deb-cd4c-57dd-85c8-5d8c20296618@proxel.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/6/19 10:18 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Attached is a patch to do that and close the gap. With that, we will
> be able to check for inconsistencies better when working on the
> follow-up patches. What do you think?

I approve. I was when testing this stuff that I found the IF NOT EXISTS
issue.

Andreas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-02-06 16:09:59 PG_RE_THROW is mandatory (was Re: jsonpath)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2019-02-06 16:04:26 Re: Refactoring IndexPath representation of index conditions