Thanks Walaa and JB. Really looking forward to seeing how this spec
evolves next.
I think different engines who share these MVs will have very different
levels of rewrite and (incremental) refresh capabilities. So capturing as
much as possible around the query, lineage, staleness tolerance and e
Hi Benny
Thanks for your message. I think the idea is to "smoothly"
(implicitly) add regular table storage over a view.
The MV approach is right now in discussion, without consensus so far.
We plan to have document/meeting to discuss further.
Regards
JB
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 7:18 AM Benny Chow
Hi Benny,
For the first part of your question, yes, the intention is to switch
between the virtual view and the materialized storage table transparently,
and use the storage table as long as it is fresh.
For the second part, this dimension of the MV problem has been discussed as
part of the curre
Hey Everyone
I've been following the MV spec and listened in on the last community
sync. I'd like to chime in from a query planner point of view on how the
MVs could be used.
Suppose a user has a dashboard query like:
*SELECT product, sum(sales) *
*FROM view1 *
*WHERE brand = 'X' and year = '20
