Re: Should a materialized view be based on a view?

On 18 November 2011 22:26, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> I still have a lot of reading to do before I propose anything
> concrete for development, but one thing that has already struck me
> as a common theme for MVs is that a lot of people seem to like the
> idea of first creating a "normal" view, and then materializing it.
> That seems pretty attractive to me, too.  How do people feel about
> that as a fundamental design decision: that a MV would always have
> a corresponding view (under a different name or in a different
> schema)?  Love it or hate it?

Is there a need to create it as a normal view first? Can't the CREATE
VIEW syntax be expanded to support MV capabilities? (CREATE [
MATERIALIZED ] VIEW...) And then ALTER VIEW can materialise a regular
view, or dematerialise a materialised view.

--
Thom Brown
Twitter: @darkixion
IRC (freenode): dark_ixion
Registered Linux user: #516935

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company