Re: CREATE UNLOGGED MATERIALIZED VIEW

From: Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
To: Mitar <mmitar(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CREATE UNLOGGED MATERIALIZED VIEW
Date: 2018-12-25 18:25:23
Message-ID: ba64973f-c803-5718-d97d-7ea2fcc61db1@aklaver.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 12/25/18 10:16 AM, Mitar wrote:
> Hi!
>
> That is for transient tables (NEW and OLD tables), no? Not for the
> main materialized view table.

Don't know. From my POV MATERIALIZED VIEWS are transient any way you
look at them. They capture a state at a point in time and then the data
they depend on moves on. Given that they can be refreshed at will not
sure logging/not logging really matters.

>
>
> Mitar
>
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 10:14 AM Adrian Klaver
> <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/25/18 1:13 AM, Mitar wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I am looking at parser grammar rules and it looks like the following
>>> is a valid query:
>>>
>>> CREATE UNLOGGED MATERIALIZED VIEW
>>>
>>> Any particular reason this is not documented?
>>
>> My guess because of this:
>>
>> https://doxygen.postgresql.org/matview_8c.html
>>
>> Line 458-461
>>
>> "/*
>> * We can skip WAL-logging the insertions, unless PITR or streaming
>> * replication is in use. We can skip the FSM in any case.
>> */
>> "
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mitar
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Adrian Klaver
>> adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
>
>
>

--
Adrian Klaver
adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mitar 2018-12-25 18:29:05 Re: CREATE UNLOGGED MATERIALIZED VIEW
Previous Message Mitar 2018-12-25 18:16:07 Re: CREATE UNLOGGED MATERIALIZED VIEW