As you people think and may be possible that complete implementation of Eager MVs cannot be completed in summer. So maybe i can pick up the work left to be done in snapshot MVs. I have cloned the repository of pavel baros from https://github.com/pbaros/postgres.git and i will be looking to find whats left out.
Could anybody help me in figuring out what is left to be done in snapshot MVs implementation? There are a number of hard problems in getting a working implementation of > materialized views that all get ignored by all of the student proposals we > get, and what you're talking about doesn't address any of them. > > As soon as i know the shortcomings of snapshot MVs implementation and once go through the code committed during GSoC, I will revert back with the issues and how would i be tackling them. You really should read all of the messages in the following threads: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-04/msg00479.php > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-06/msg00743.php > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-07/msg00396.php > > And the following summaries: > > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Materialized_Views_GSoC_2010 > http://rhaas.blogspot.com/2010/04/materialized-views-in-postgresql.html > > And then say how what you're suggesting fits into the issues raised last > summer. The theory and way to implement eager MVs are interesting > problems. But working on them won't lead toward code that can be committed > to PostgreSQL this year. >
