Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <kgrittn@mail.com> writes:
>> Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> What use would a temporary matview be?
>
>> It would be essentially like a temporary table, with all the same
>> persistence options. I'm not really sure how often it will be more
>> useful than a temporary table before we have incremental
>> maintenance of materialized views; once we have that, though, it
>> seems likely that there could be reasonable use cases.
>
> One of the principal attributes of a temp table is that its
> contents aren't (reliably) accessible from anywhere except the
> owning backend. Not sure where you're going to hide the incremental
> maintenance in that scenario.
The more I think about that, the less sensible temporary MVs seem.
Unless I can figure out some reasonable use case, I'll diable that in
the next version of the patch.
-Kevin