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

On 18 November 2011 23:26, 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?
>
> -Kevin
>
>

Hi Kevin,
maybe a stupid question... but why? It looks like for creating a function I
should create another function earlier. For me the design should be simple.
If you want to create something below my MV, thats fine for me, if I don't
need to know that (just like when creating a serial column).

regards
Szymon