| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Nicolas Barbier <nicolas(dot)barbier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope(at)jackdb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Materialized views don't show up in information_schema |
| Date: | 2014-10-18 00:03:18 |
| Message-ID: | 20141018000318.GY28859@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Nicolas Barbier (nicolas(dot)barbier(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> 2014-10-16 Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>:
>
> > Alright, coming back to this, I have to ask- how are matviews different
> > from views from the SQL standard's perspective?
>
> Matviews that are always up to date when you access them are
> semantically exactly the same as normal views. Matviews that can get
> out of date, however, are not.
And when we have matviews which can be kept up to date..?
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2014-10-18 00:10:31 | Re: Materialized views don't show up in information_schema |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2014-10-17 23:53:32 | Re: Optimizer on sort aggregate |