Re: Progress Report on Materialized Views

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
Cc: "'Jonathan M(dot) Gardner'" <jgardner(at)jonathangardner(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Progress Report on Materialized Views
Date: 2004-02-21 16:43:02
Message-ID: 12156.1077381782@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Could I suggest that your next step is to sync up with the work being
> done on tuning the DBT-3 query workload? As I'm sure you're aware, that
> is very similar to TPC-H workload, where most of the commercial RDBMS
> vendors utilise Materialized Views to enhance certain queries.

Oh? As far as I can tell, TPC-H forbids use of materialized views.
See sections 1.5.6 and 1.5.7 of the spec. The effect of the fine print
seems to be that the only way you are allowed to store extra copies of
data is as indexes over columns that are primary keys, foreign keys,
or date columns.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Hallgren 2004-02-21 17:22:51 Re: Pl/Java - next step?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-02-21 16:31:50 Re: Pl/Java - next step?