Re: refresh materialized view concurrently

From: Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: refresh materialized view concurrently
Date: 2013-07-12 08:11:19
Message-ID: CAP7Qgm=qJcDcDPy19_L6+jBwzSFEcGhVws5qFdgEYTqQT244Sg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Thanks again! New patch attached.
>

After a couple of more attempts trying to break it, I mark this as
ready to go. One small question: why do we use multiple unique
indexes if exist? One index isn't enough?

--
Hitoshi Harada

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2013-07-12 09:42:23 Re: mvcc catalo gsnapshots and TopTransactionContext
Previous Message Abhijit Menon-Sen 2013-07-12 06:32:18 Re: XLogInsert scaling, revisited