Kevin, > The reason was that the start of CF4 was deemed too late in the > development cycle to be trying to design what that should look > like. No sooner had you suggested that one column than someone > suggested two others which might also be useful, and it seemed to
Yeah, I'm just pointing out that we *already had* this discussion, so there isn't any point in having it again. > That was deemed to be incompatible with unlogged matviews, which > some didn't want to give up in this initial release. Huh? Unlogged tables don't go in pg_class? > Basically, what this patch aims at is more or less what some other > databases had in their initial releases of materialized views 10 to > 20 years ago. Other products have built on those foundations with > each major release. I was hoping we could do the same. We are not > going to reach parity on this with any other major database product > in one release, or probably even two or three. Yep. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
