| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)mail(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Materialized views WIP patch |
| Date: | 2012-11-26 16:02:17 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_U_D=gp-DmfmkeRvaQqwO5UZj75y96Z0J3te7puetRnqQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 26 November 2012 15:24, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> I hate to add to the bike-shedding, but we should probably add REFRESH
> SNAPSHOT as an optional piece of the grammar, with more REFRESH
> options to come.
I don't know that they should be called materialised views, but do we
really need to overload the word snapshot? I'd just as soon invent a
new word as use the Oracle one, since I don't think the term snapshot
is widely recognised as referring to anything other than snapshot
isolation.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-11-26 16:04:11 | Re: Duplicated oids between tables - problem or not? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-11-26 16:00:35 | Re: change in LOCK behavior |