At 11:38 18/07/01 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> writes:
>> I think any deisgn needs to cater for attr dependencies. eg.
>
>I don't really see a need to recognize dependencies at finer than table
>level. I'd just make the dependency be from view_a to a and keep things
>simple. What's so wrong with recompiling the view for *every* change
>of the underlying table?
>
Not a problem for views, but when you get to constraints on large tables,
re-evaluating all the constraints unnecessarily could be a nightmare, and
especially frustrating when you just dropped an irrelevant attr.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \| | --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/