| 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: | 2019-02-04 15:10:09 |
| Message-ID: | 9688b7e7-f994-81be-8295-f42f567947fa@proxel.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/4/19 7:09 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:10:17AM +0100, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
>> On 1/21/19 3:31 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
>>> Here is a a stab at refactoring this so the object creation does not
>>> happen in a callback.
>>
>> Rebased my patch on top of Andres's pluggable storage patches. Plus some
>> minor style changes.
>
> Taking a note to look at this refactoring bit, which is different from
> the temp matview part. Moved to next CF for now.
Should I submit it as a separate CF entry or is it easiest if my
refactoring and Mi Tar's feature are reviewed together?
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Adrien NAYRAT | 2019-02-04 15:32:05 | Re: Log a sample of transactions |
| Previous Message | Alexey Kondratov | 2019-02-04 13:49:08 | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |