Received: from localhost (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E55B9FB3B5 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 10:50:46 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10825-08-2 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 10:50:26 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: delayed 00:17:54.074832 by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from rootabega.88thstreet.com (dsl254-071-237.nyc1.dsl.speakeasy.net [216.254.71.237]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE9229FB231 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 10:50:15 -0400 (AST) Received: from www.88thstreet.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rootabega.88thstreet.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l26EWJxO019167 for ; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 09:32:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from 63.118.86.10 (SquirrelMail authenticated user radhika) by www.88thstreet.com with HTTP; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 09:32:19 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <13619.63.118.86.10.1173191539.squirrel@www.88thstreet.com> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 09:32:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: View Vs. Table From: "Radhika Sambamurti" To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Reply-To: radhika@88thstreet.com User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.135 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=BAYES_60, FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200703/91 X-Sequence-Number: 27729 Hi, I have two tables which currently are being aggregated into a third table. I am proposing eliminating or drastically shortening the 3rd aggregation table, and instead just using a View. Which brings me to the question, which is better? Reading from a table or a view or is there a difference in performance?