On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> wrote:
> Barring a sudden confluence of opinion, I will go with TRUNCATE for
> the initial spelling. I tend to favor that spelling for several
> reasons. One was the size of the patch needed to add the opposite
> of REFRESH to the backend code:
FWIW, I found Andres's point about closing the door on updatable views
quite convincing. If at any point we want to add updatable
materialized views, it seems like a bad inconsistency to have TRUNCATE
mean something completely different from DELETE. While update
capability for materialized views might not be a common use case, I
don't think it's fair to completely shut the door on it to have easier
implementation and shorter syntax. Especially as the shorter syntax is
semantically inconsistent - normal truncate removes the data,
materialized view just makes the data inaccessible until the next
refresh.
Sorry for weighing in late, but it seemed to me that this point didn't
get enough consideration.
Ants Aasma
--
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de