Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance

From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: "r(dot)takahashi_2(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <r(dot)takahashi_2(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Zhihong Yu' <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Andy Fan <zhihui(dot)fan1213(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance
Date: 2022-01-13 10:23:42
Message-ID: 20220113102342.mlhknuy6ppypflq3@jrouhaud
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 04:37:10PM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 04:31:25 +0000
> "r(dot)takahashi_2(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <r(dot)takahashi_2(at)fujitsu(dot)com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I checked the same procedure on v24 patch.
> > But following error occurs instead of the original error.
> >
> > ERROR: relation "ivm_t_index" already exists
>
> Thank you for pointing out it!
>
> Hmmm, an index is created when IMMV is defined, so CREAE INDEX called
> after this would fail... Maybe, we should not create any index automatically
> if IMMV is created WITH NO DATA.
>
> I'll fix it after some investigation.

Are you still investigating on that problem? Also, the patchset doesn't apply
anymore:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_36_2138.log
=== Applying patches on top of PostgreSQL commit ID a18b6d2dc288dfa6e7905ede1d4462edd6a8af47 ===
[...]
=== applying patch ./v24-0005-Add-Incremental-View-Maintenance-support-to-pg_d.patch
patching file src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 6393.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 6596.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 6719.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 6796.
Hunk #5 succeeded at 14953 (offset -915 lines).
4 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c.rej

There isn't any answer to your following email summarizing the feature yet, so
I'm not sure what should be the status of this patch, as there's no ideal
category for that. For now I'll change the patch to Waiting on Author on the
cf app, feel free to switch it back to Needs Review if you think it's more
suitable, at least for the design discussion need.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dilip Kumar 2022-01-13 10:25:49 Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2022-01-13 10:23:06 Re: row filtering for logical replication