| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pavelbaros <baros(dot)p(at)seznam(dot)cz>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: GSoC - proposal - Materialized Views in PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2010-04-12 03:00:57 |
| Message-ID: | g2t603c8f071004112000o6028510l3e97aeb58bb00bec@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 10:13 PM, Florian G. Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> wrote:
> If continuous updates prove to be too hard initially, you could instead
> update the view on select if it's outdated. Such a materialized view
> would be a kind of inter-session cache for subselects.
>
> The hard part would probably be to figure out how to decide whether the
> view is outdated or not, and to deal with two concurrent transactions
> trying to use an outdates view (and both trying to refresh it). What
> makes the second problem hard is that you wouldn't want one of the
> transactions to wait for the other to complete, because this is not how
> SELECTs traditionally behave.
Well, the proposed project is to create views that only get refreshed manually.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-04-12 03:09:45 | Re: GSoC - proposal - Materialized Views in PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2010-04-12 02:13:34 | Re: GSoC - proposal - Materialized Views in PostgreSQL |