Re: Materialized views don't show up in information_schema

From: Nicolas Barbier <nicolas(dot)barbier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope(at)jackdb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Materialized views don't show up in information_schema
Date: 2014-10-17 08:47:01
Message-ID: CAP-rdTYYawjkRG8xvf=92e5vSge92U9YeHeav_oop1BCCRo-BQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2014-10-16 Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>:

> Alright, coming back to this, I have to ask- how are matviews different
> from views from the SQL standard's perspective?

Matviews that are always up to date when you access them are
semantically exactly the same as normal views. Matviews that can get
out of date, however, are not.

Nicolas

--
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion.
Q. Why is top posting bad?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message furuyao 2014-10-17 08:55:42 Re: pg_receivexlog --status-interval add fsync feedback
Previous Message Thom Brown 2014-10-17 08:24:04 Re: CREATE POLICY and RETURNING