Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jonathan(dot)katz(at)excoventures(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com>, dian(dot)m(dot)fay(at)gmail(dot)com, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: docs: note ownership requirement for refreshing materialized views
Date: 2018-08-18 08:08:18
Message-ID: 20180818080818.GA2574@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 05:12:42PM -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>> On Aug 17, 2018, at 9:21 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Dave Cramer <davecramer(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> So it seems this patch is being ignored in this thread.
>>
>> Well, Jonathan did kind of hijack what appears to be a thread about
>> documentation (with an already-committed fix).
>
> I apologize if it was interpreted as hijacking, I had brought it up in
> my initial reply to Dian, as I’ve seen others do similarly on threads.

Don't worry, we all learn here ;)
I saw your patch, looked at it a couple of seconds and got really
surprised by its logic, moving to something else before lookng back at
it.

>> I'd suggest reposting that patch in its own thread and adding it to
>> the next CF.
>
> I will go ahead and do this.

Thanks for spawning a different thread. That helps in attracting the
correct attention to the correct issues.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masayuki Takahashi 2018-08-18 12:01:53 Re: How to estimate the shared memory size required for parallel scan?
Previous Message Karen Huddleston 2018-08-18 05:17:20 Re: Conflict handling for COPY FROM