Re: Would like to sponsor implementation of MATERIALIZED VIEWS

On May 15, 2008, at 1:40 AM, js(at)deriva(dot)de wrote:
> as I posted already in the general newsgroup our company has decided
> that we would like to sponsor the implementation of materialized views
> for Postgres.
> However at the moment we have no idea about the complexity of the
> implementation and therefore what the cost would be. Since the point
> is already on the TODO List, are there already any (rough) estimates?
>
> The TODO List reads:
> "Right now materialized views require the user to create triggers on
> the main table to keep the summary table current. SQL syntax should be
> able to manager the triggers and summary table automatically."
> And this is what we need.
>
> "A more sophisticated implementation would automatically retrieve from
> the summary table when the main table is referenced, if possible."
> If this means that e.g. a query would "know by itself" that it could
> get the data from the view instead of from the main table, then we
> don't need this feature at the moment. Otherwise: Could anyone

Has anyone contacted the OP about implementing this? Do we have
procedure in place for people to sponsor major features like this?
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828