V. does something different than CREATE, there would
> certainly be value in being able to EXPLAIN what that does --- but
> that still isn't an argument for allowing EXPLAIN CREATE MATERIALIZED
> VIEW.
We already allow EXPLAIN ANALYZE CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW in all
supported versions.
save_sec_context = 0;
+ int save_nestlevel = 0;
+
if (es->memory)
{
/*
@@ -487,6 +493,24 @@ standard_ExplainOneQuery(Query *query, int cursorOptions,
bufusage_start = pgBufferUsage;
INSTR_TIME_SET_CURRENT(planstart);
+ /*
+ * For CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW command, switch to the owner'
Jeff Davis writes:
> As you point out in the other email, it's not easy to make that all
> work with REFRESH ... CONCURRENTLY, but perhaps it could work with
> CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW and REFRESH (without CONCURRENTLY).
I'm not really sure I see the point of this, if it doesn
not easy to make that all
work with REFRESH ... CONCURRENTLY, but perhaps it could work with
CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW and REFRESH (without CONCURRENTLY).
Regards,
Jeff Davis
On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 02:13:04 +0900
Yugo Nagata wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Aug 2024 13:34:51 -0700
> Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2024-08-02 at 00:13 +0500, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> > > On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > > >
> > > > EXP
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 at 22:13, Yugo Nagata wrote:
>
> On Thu, 01 Aug 2024 13:34:51 -0700
> Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2024-08-02 at 00:13 +0500, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> > > On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
On Thu, 01 Aug 2024 13:34:51 -0700
Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-08-02 at 00:13 +0500, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > >
> > > EXPLAIN ANALYZE CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW doesn't go through
> &g
On Tue, 6 Aug 2024 at 21:06, Yugo Nagata wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:41:18 +0500
> Kirill Reshke wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > > Relatedly, if we can EXPLAIN a CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW, perhaps we
> > > should be able to
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 23:41:18 +0500
Kirill Reshke wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > Relatedly, if we can EXPLAIN a CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW, perhaps we
> > should be able to EXPLAIN a REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, too?
> Sure
REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW co
On Fri, 2024-08-02 at 00:13 +0500, Kirill Reshke wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
> >
> > EXPLAIN ANALYZE CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW doesn't go through
> > ExecCreateTableAs(), but does use CreateIntoRelDestReceiver().
>
> EXPLAIN ANALYZ
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
>
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW doesn't go through
> ExecCreateTableAs(), but does use CreateIntoRelDestReceiver().
EXPLAIN ANALYZE and regular query goes through create_ctas_internal
(WITH NO DATA case too). Maybe we c
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 23:27, Jeff Davis wrote:
> Relatedly, if we can EXPLAIN a CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW, perhaps we
> should be able to EXPLAIN a REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW, too?
Sure
> Comments?
Seems like this is indeed inconsistent behaviour and should be fixed
in all PGDG-supported
EXPLAIN ANALYZE CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW doesn't go through
ExecCreateTableAs(), but does use CreateIntoRelDestReceiver().
That bypasses the SECURITY_RESTRICTED_OPERATION in ExecCreateTableAs().
That is *not* a security problem, because the
SECURITY_RESTRICTED_OPERATION in CREATE MATERIA
Nathan Bossart writes:
> Committed.
Thanks!
- ilmari
Committed.
--
nathan
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 04:10:37PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Done: https://commitfest.postgresql.org/49/5139/
>
> I've taken the liberty of setting you as the committer, and the target
> version to 17 even though it turns out to be an older bug, since it's
> arguably a follow-on fix
Nathan Bossart writes:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 03:49:02PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> Nathan Bossart writes:
>>> However, since it looks like the feature was never actually supported in a
>>> release, and the revert has been in place for over a decade, I think it'd
>>> be reasona
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 03:49:02PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Nathan Bossart writes:
>> However, since it looks like the feature was never actually supported in a
>> release, and the revert has been in place for over a decade, I think it'd
>> be reasonable to remove the tab completio
Nathan Bossart writes:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 03:09:09PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
>> Scratch that, I misread the diff. The tab completion has been there
>> since matviews were added in commit 3bf3ab8c5636, but the restriction on
>> unlogged matviews was added later in commit 3223
On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 03:09:09PM +0100, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker wrote:
> Scratch that, I misread the diff. The tab completion has been there
> since matviews were added in commit 3bf3ab8c5636, but the restriction on
> unlogged matviews was added later in commit 3223b25ff73, which failed to
> upd
Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker writes:
> px shi writes:
>
>> Hi, I see that materialized view cannot be unlogged now, but when I use
>> psql and type CREATE UNLOGGED, pressing the Tab key for auto-completion
>> suggests `TABLE` and MATERIALIZED VIEW.
>> Shouldn't `MATERIALIZED VIEW ` be suggested?
>
>
px shi writes:
> Hi, I see that materialized view cannot be unlogged now, but when I use
> psql and type CREATE UNLOGGED, pressing the Tab key for auto-completion
> suggests `TABLE` and MATERIALIZED VIEW.
> Shouldn't `MATERIALIZED VIEW ` be suggested?
That's my fault, I added it in commit c951e9
Hi, I see that materialized view cannot be unlogged now, but when I use
psql and type CREATE UNLOGGED, pressing the Tab key for auto-completion
suggests `TABLE` and MATERIALIZED VIEW.
Shouldn't `MATERIALIZED VIEW ` be suggested?
23 matches
Mail list logo
