| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Mitar <mmitar(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Feature: triggers on materialized views |
| Date: | 2019-04-01 07:06:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20190401070610.GC16093@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 03:41:08PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Yeah. The fact that a concurrent refresh currently does DELETE+INSERT
> rather than UPDATE is currently an implementation detail. If you
> allow users to hook up triggers to the inserts, then suddenly it's no
> longer an implementation detail: it is a user-visible behavior that
> can't be changed in the future without breaking backward
> compatibility.
We are visibly going nowhere for this thread for v12, so I have marked
the proposal as returned with feedback.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jamison, Kirk | 2019-04-01 07:40:10 | RE: Timeout parameters |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2019-04-01 06:59:19 | Re: pgsql: Compute XID horizon for page level index vacuum on primary. |