Hello Takahashi-san, On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 04:27:13 +0000 "r.takahash...@fujitsu.com" <r.takahash...@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi Nagata-san, > > > Sorry for late reply. > > > > However, even if we create triggers recursively on the parents or children, > > we would still > > need more consideration. This is because we will have to convert the format > > of tuple of > > modified table to the format of the table specified in the view for cases > > that the parent > > and some children have different format. > > > > I think supporting partitioned tables can be left for the next release. > > OK. I understand. > In the v24-patch, creating IVM on partions or partition table is prohibited. > It is OK but it should be documented. > > Perhaps, the following statement describe this. > If so, I think the definition of "simple base table" is ambiguous for some > users. > > + IMMVs must be based on simple base tables. It's not supported to > + create them on top of views or materialized views. Oh, I forgot to fix the documentation. I'll fix it. Ragards, Yugo Nagata -- Yugo NAGATA <nag...@sraoss.co.jp>
