On Wed, 2024-07-31 at 18:20 +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote: > I agree that it might not be important, but I think adding the flag > would be > also helpful for improving code-readability because it clarify the > function > is used in the two cases. I attached patch for this fix (patch 0003).
Committed with one minor modification: I moved the boolean flag to be near the other booleans rather than at the end. Thank you. > Sure. I fixed the patch to remove 'param' from both functions. (patch > 0002) Committed, thank you. > I also add the small refactoring around ExecCreateTableAs(). (patch > 0001) > > - Remove matview-related codes from intorel_startup. > Materialized views are no longer handled in this function. > > - RefreshMatViewByOid is moved to just after create_ctas_nodata > call to improve code readability. > I'm not sure the changes in intorel_startup() are correct. I tried adding an Assert(into->viewQuery == NULL), and it fails because there's another path I did not consider: "EXPLAIN ANALYZE CREATE MATERIALIZED VIEW ...", which does not go through ExecCreateTableAs() but does go through CreateIntoRelDestReceiver(). See: https://postgr.es/m/20444c382e6cb5e21e93c94d679d0198b0dba4dd.ca...@j-davis.com Should we refactor a bit and try to make EXPLAIN use the same code paths? Regards, Jeff Davis
