pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul A Jungwirth <pj@illuminatedcomputing.com>
Cc: Erik Wienhold <ewie@ewie.name>
Cc: Said Assemlal <sassemlal@neurorx.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Haibo Yan <haibo.yan@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: CREATE OR REPLACE MATERIALIZED VIEW
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 14:05:18 -0400
Message-ID: <3774197.1786730718@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZ3S8DhnnhR0EFSAnJ2O2NvWpriaAg-jx=9Lg2AUEpP=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e4382244-6b55-450b-a4f0-32959056ade4@ewie.name>
	<e55c4930-f788-4bb0-a684-743621d6cfc5@neurorx.com>
	<7afe68b0-f983-4a9f-a1b4-32188cebbf38@ewie.name>
	<b74736cf-a4b4-4c32-8df1-d08abe9a14ed@ewie.name>
	<d4bf3ccf-5c2b-448d-ad16-59dd6fbe2a2e@ewie.name>
	<64495e31-0a91-4894-87f8-31451ee69f44@ewie.name>
	<bf64dad9-eaaa-4911-b447-13acee89ea80@ewie.name>
	<2724629.1743885428@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<5cd7ec92-ee61-4080-8fb6-0aed6a51eeaf@ewie.name>
	<CA+renyW6-7aH74o-Gv2k+6emEXwznXxg=GkmTaKhDcresQQ9bg@mail.gmail.com>
	<6d710ac3-3a66-4b31-b35a-0b4d9afdda42@ewie.name>
	<CA+renyWJgjatyvJEKr9_GSnr3xr-sqLfhLR+rvw3MSygowR9xA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+renyW8xM3wycsYCk7nDkx4ytTNLNntaGh5-4CXNi-ns8dCOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoZ3S8DhnnhR0EFSAnJ2O2NvWpriaAg-jx=9Lg2AUEpP=A@mail.gmail.com>

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I think CREATE OR REPLACE is the wrong syntax here. I think what
> people would most often want to do is edit the query used to refresh
> the query without disturbing the existing data, indexes, or other
> ancillary properties of the view in any way, but just changing what
> happens on next refresh. We have CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION because
> replacing a function in its entirety is a sensible thing to do, but we
> don't have CREATE OR REPLACE TABLE because tables contain data that
> you're unlikely to want to throw out. Materialized views are more like
> tables in this respect: they have data. Granted, it can be
> regenerated, but that's probably expensive.

> So I'd propose that this should be a form of ALTER MATERIALIZED VIEW,
> and that it be defined as suggested above, just replacing the refresh
> query.

This approach makes sense to me.  Note that this would imply that the
revised query has to still produce the same set of columns, else it's
inconsistent with the MV's stored data (but maybe we could allow
adding new columns at the end, as with tables).  I suppose this means
that if you want a different set of columns, you have no recourse
short of dropping the MV.

			regards, tom lane






view thread (29+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <3774197.1786730718@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../3774197.1786730718@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/3774197.1786730718@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, pj@illuminatedcomputing.com, ewie@ewie.name, sassemlal@neurorx.com, haibo.yan@hotmail.com
  Subject: Re: CREATE OR REPLACE MATERIALIZED VIEW
  In-Reply-To: <3774197.1786730718@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* 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