Re: PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table

From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PG10 transition tables, wCTEs and multiple operations on the same table
Date: 2017-06-06 20:25:46
Message-ID: CACjxUsNoUiMOomJJFDAoVjQb4YeMTZhdQZxCzKxLGuYTmkqEcQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Nice as it would be to add a SQL standard feature and advance the
effort to get to incremental maintenance of materialized views, and
much as I really appreciate the efforts Thomas has put into trying
to solve these problems, I agree that it is best to revert the
feature. It took years to get an in-depth review, then I was asked
not to commit it because others were working on patches that would
conflict. That just doesn't leave enough time to address these
issues before release. Fundamentally, I'm not sure that there is a
level of interest sufficient to support the effort.

I'll give it a few days for objections before reverting.

--
Kevin Grittner
VMware vCenter Server
https://www.vmware.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-06-06 20:28:28 Re: intermittent failures in Cygwin from select_parallel tests
Previous Message Tom Lane 2017-06-06 20:25:37 Re: intermittent failures in Cygwin from select_parallel tests