Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

Le 10/33/2017 à 21:33, David G. Johnston écrivait : >On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Melvin Davidson ><[1]melvin6...@gmail.com> wrote: > >Can we all agree that the "Materialized View" should be faster >​ > Yes. The OP told about a 500K rows view. Every select queries on that view

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote: > Can we all agree that the "Materialized View" should be faster I think we have. > and stop this pointless bickering about naming convention, > which I have already stated, is just an opinion and too late to change at this point? Novel o

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote: > > Can we all agree that the "Materialized View" should be faster > ​ > > If you add in the condition that the same answer has to be returned whether you query the view or the mat-view then no, I wouldn't agree; and the original question is

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

> > > "A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet”. Actually there’s no “still” in that line, if you’re quoting Shakespeare. And the full “That which we call a rose …” is truly appropriate here. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Melvin Davidson > wrote: > > > IMHO, I disagree. I feel a better name would be "materialized > > table". > > The dictionary defines "materialize" as meaning "become actual > fact" or "appear in bodily form"

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote: > IMHO, I disagree. I feel a better name would be "materialized > table". The dictionary defines "materialize" as meaning "become actual fact" or "appear in bodily form". In the database environment, it generally means that the data is act

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote: > >> > >I disagree with the notion that defining a relation in terms of a > >query (like a view) and materializing the results (like a table) > >makes "materialized view" a misleading name. > > > *IMHO, I disagree. I feel a better name woul

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 2:31 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Melvin Davidson > wrote: > > > fyi, a view is nothing more than just that, a view. > > A materialized view, afaic, is a misleading name, it is actually > > a valid table and you can create indexes on them,

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Melvin Davidson wrote: > fyi, a view is nothing more than just that, a view. > A materialized view, afaic, is a misleading name, it is actually > a valid table and you can create indexes on them, I disagree with the notion that defining a relation in terms of a

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 01/10/2017 10:27 AM, Job wrote: > >> Hi guys, >> >> iam making some tests with a massive number of "select" queries (only >> for reading datas) on a view and a materialized view. >> We use Postgresql 9.6.1 on a 64bit server. >> >> Only fo

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Job wrote: > Hi guys, > > i am making some tests with a massive number of "select" queries (only > for reading datas) on a view and a materialized view. > We use Postgresql 9.6.1 on a 64bit server. > > Only for "select" queries, which one is faster and less expen

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

On 01/10/2017 10:27 AM, Job wrote: Hi guys, iam making some tests with a massive number of "select" queries (only for reading datas) on a view and a materialized view. We use Postgresql 9.6.1 on a 64bit server. Only for "select" queries, which one is faster and less expensive as resources cost?

[GENERAL] Materialized view vs. view

Hi guys, i am making some tests with a massive number of "select" queries (only for reading datas) on a view and a materialized view. We use Postgresql 9.6.1 on a 64bit server. Only for "select" queries, which one is faster and less expensive as resources cost? The view or the materialized view

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view auto refresh

On 9/6/16 9:47 PM, Nguyễn Trần Quốc Vinh wrote: I'm sorry. Please check it again at http://it.ued.udn.vn/myprojects/pgTriggerGen/: http://it.ued.udn.vn/myprojects/pgTriggerGen/PgSQLMVTriggersGenerator_v2_src.rar. FWIW, people would be much more likely to find this if you put it on GitHub (and

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view auto refresh

Dear Harry. I'm sorry. Please check it again at http://it.ued.udn.vn/myprojects/pgTriggerGen/: http://it.ued.udn.vn/myprojects/pgTriggerGen/PgSQLMVTriggersGenerator_v2_src.rar . Best regards, On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:42 PM, hari.prasath wrote: > Dear Nguyen Tran Quoc Vinh > Source link

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view auto refresh

Dear Nguyen Tran Quoc Vinh Source link is broken. Please check this http://it.ued.udn.vn/myprojects/pgTriggerGen/PgSQLMVTriggersGenerator_src.rar cheers - Harry On Mon, 05 Sep 2016 11:50:49 +0530 Nguyễn Trần Quốc Vinh wrote Dear Harry. You

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view auto refresh

Dear Harry. You can try this while you are waiting the better solution from Prof. Kevin Grittner. We did not improve because we do not know if we are in the right way... https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/caau9oxsb5gy8lz12kqaa3r1iv19c7famnefixdac1fhrfyt...@mail.gmail.com You can downloat the

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view auto refresh

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:50 AM, hari.prasath wrote: > Is there any tentative schedule for real-time or incremental(only > applying delta changes) refresh of materialized views.?. There is work in progress, but no hard schedule. Unfortunately, it has often been set aside to address more im

[GENERAL] Materialized view auto refresh

Hi all Is there any tentative schedule for real-time or incremental(only applying delta changes) refresh of materialized views.?. Since in concurrent refresh the full view has been created from the base tables. cheers - Harry

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view not created with import

On 07/05/2016 06:28 AM, Aurelien Praga wrote: Hello, I need your help because I have a materialized view not created during an import. This materialized view is using a function and this function depends on a table. When importing the database dump: - the function is created - the materialized v

[GENERAL] Materialized view not created with import

Hello, I need your help because I have a materialized view not created during an import. This materialized view is using a function and this function depends on a table. When importing the database dump: - the function is created - the materialized view is not created because the table used by the

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized View or table?

On 9/15/15 2:14 AM, Johann Spies wrote: What are the pro's and con's of large materialized views vs. tables in a case like this? AFAIK a matview is essentially the same as a table under the covers, so I don't believe there's any reason not to use one. At some point we'll have incremental refr

[GENERAL] Materialized View or table?

I have a table (A) with 750+ million records and another one (B) which is a summary of information in A containing 30+million records. Now I wonder whether it wouldn't be better to have B as an indexed materialized view. Though not often, there will be situations where B has to be updated. In th

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view from PG to Oracle?

Thank you for the info Ian! Maybe I'm looking at this from the wrong perspective... Please review below. *My Current process:* Oracle DB1 |--->materialized view log (records changes to table X) Oracle DB2 |--->materialized view (pulls data from mv log every 3 minutes) *My Future process:* Postg

Re: [GENERAL] Materialized view from PG to Oracle?

2014-03-12 12:00 GMT+09:00 Roy Anderson : > Good day. We are transitioning over one database to Postgres as a test but > retain an Oracle presence. The PG db in question is (it is currently still > running Oracle) feeds a couple other Oracle dbs via materialized view logs > and materialized views.

[GENERAL] Materialized view from PG to Oracle?

Good day. We are transitioning over one database to Postgres as a test but retain an Oracle presence. The PG db in question is (it is currently still running Oracle) feeds a couple other Oracle dbs via materialized view logs and materialized views. Is it possible to achieve the same MV functionalit

Re: [GENERAL] materialized view

yes , not in native form, but making few things here a link about this http://jonathangardner.net/PostgreSQL/materialized_views/matviews.html bys 2005/5/20, Himanshu Baweja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > does postgres support materialized view.. if yes can somebody post any links > which might be use

Re: [GENERAL] materialized view

The BizGres project is also looking at adding materialized views. On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 11:52:01PM -0700, Ben wrote: > A quick google search for "materialized views on postgres" brings up > this very helpful page that I've used before: > > http://jonathangardner.net/PostgreSQL/materialized_vi

Re: [GENERAL] materialized view

A quick google search for "materialized views on postgres" brings up this very helpful page that I've used before: http://jonathangardner.net/PostgreSQL/materialized_views/matviews.html On May 19, 2005, at 11:40 PM, Himanshu Baweja wrote: does postgres support materialized view.. if yes can some

[GENERAL] materialized view

does postgres support materialized view.. if yes can somebody post any links which might be useful in learning how to use them... thx Himanshu__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com