From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <pgmail(at)joh(dot)to>, 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 13:42:05 |
Message-ID: | CAEYLb_Wu8A0Svg1Vqn3+OpQ=Ggqbza+RfRE_LFaM5ZyahRM8Sw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 26 November 2012 13:07, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> None of those patches were small patches. It's going to take multiple
> years to get materialized views up to a state where they're really
> useful to a broad audience in production applications, but I don't
> think we should sneer at anyone for writing a patch that is "just
> syntactic sugar".
+1. I have a sweet tooth. I don't like it when people criticise
patches on the basis of "obviously you could achieve the same effect
with $CONVOLUTION". Making things simpler is a desirable outcome. Now,
that isn't to say that we should disregard everything or even anything
else in pursuit of simplicity; just that "needing a Ph.D is
Postgresology", as you once put it, to do something routine to many is
really hard to defend.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2012-11-26 13:42:21 | Re: Review: Patch to compute Max LSN of Data Pages |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2012-11-26 13:31:05 | Re: Plugging fd leaks (was Re: Switching timeline over streaming replication) |