From: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
To: Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Cc: r.takahashi_2@fujitsu.com <r.takahashi_2@fujitsu.com>
Cc: Zhihong Yu <zyu@yugabyte.com>
Cc: vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 18:23:42 +0800
Message-ID: <20220113102342.mlhknuy6ppypflq3@jrouhaud> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211125163710.2f32ae3d4be5d5f9ade020b6@sraoss.co.jp>
References: <20210517133646.04c3d9ed232af22c0f290ebc@sraoss.co.jp>
<CALDaNm2UoQ64B-GW0q4U_5RURddKSmsJMjDv2f-uM6c4+QakSw@mail.gmail.com>
<20210719092430.54f991cb313323eaafb56311@sraoss.co.jp>
<20210802152834.ecbaba6e17d1957547c3a55d@sraoss.co.jp>
<CALNJ-vTaGk4AvjrCPPkW_GyWQ+KeW_dFA=hakcxfy=rGF28TWQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CALNJ-vRSVtqZDXU6-DjdycFkjonxKs2TbBFb=W=W9Y7KG0rRwA@mail.gmail.com>
<OS0PR01MB56829A65926C0FF7CF00F5EB82D29@OS0PR01MB5682.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<20210922191227.09a9891ec9da5ebe67475f1f@sraoss.co.jp>
<OS0PR01MB5682B499319EBEB59F416AD582619@OS0PR01MB5682.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
<20211125163710.2f32ae3d4be5d5f9ade020b6@sraoss.co.jp>
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 04:37:10PM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 04:31:25 +0000
> "r.takahashi_2@fujitsu.com" <r.takahashi_2@fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I checked the same procedure on v24 patch.
> > But following error occurs instead of the original error.
> >
> > ERROR: relation "ivm_t_index" already exists
>
> Thank you for pointing out it!
>
> Hmmm, an index is created when IMMV is defined, so CREAE INDEX called
> after this would fail... Maybe, we should not create any index automatically
> if IMMV is created WITH NO DATA.
>
> I'll fix it after some investigation.
Are you still investigating on that problem? Also, the patchset doesn't apply
anymore:
http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_36_2138.log
=== Applying patches on top of PostgreSQL commit ID a18b6d2dc288dfa6e7905ede1d4462edd6a8af47 ===
[...]
=== applying patch ./v24-0005-Add-Incremental-View-Maintenance-support-to-pg_d.patch
patching file src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c
Hunk #1 FAILED at 6393.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 6596.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 6719.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 6796.
Hunk #5 succeeded at 14953 (offset -915 lines).
4 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/bin/pg_dump/pg_dump.c.rej
There isn't any answer to your following email summarizing the feature yet, so
I'm not sure what should be the status of this patch, as there's no ideal
category for that. For now I'll change the patch to Waiting on Author on the
cf app, feel free to switch it back to Needs Review if you think it's more
suitable, at least for the design discussion need.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: rjuju123@gmail.com, nagata@sraoss.co.jp, r.takahashi_2@fujitsu.com, zyu@yugabyte.com, vignesh21@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew@dunslane.net, zhihui.fan1213@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, ishii@sraoss.co.jp, thomas.munro@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance
In-Reply-To: <20220113102342.mlhknuy6ppypflq3@jrouhaud>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox