Hi all, just wanted to say I am very happy to see progress made on this, my codebase has multiple "materialized tables" which are maintained with statement triggers (transition tables) and custom functions. They are ugly and a pain to maintain, but they work because I have no other solution...for now at least.
I am concerned that the eager approach only addresses a subset of the MV use > case space, though. For example, if we presume that an MV is present > because > the underlying direct query would be non-performant, then we have to at > least question whether applying the delta-update would also be detrimental > to some use cases. > I will say that in my case, as long as my reads of the materialized view are always consistent with the underlying data, that's what's important. I don't mind if it's eager, or lazy (as long as lazy still means it will refresh prior to reading).
