On 10/04/13 23:33, Vincent Veyron wrote: > Le lundi 08 avril 2013 à 09:36 -0700, Mike Christensen a écrit : >> This is the number one requested feature on Uservoice: >> >> >> http://postgresql.uservoice.com/forums/21853-general/suggestions/247548-materialized-views >> >> > > I find this rather surprising, considering the fact that a properly > tuned database will return queries over millions of rows and multiple > joins in milliseconds, given the proper hardware. > > I can see how a datawharehouse with terrabytes of data can make use of > them, but that is hardly a common situation. It seems to me many of > these people clamouring for materialized views would be better off > simply using a proprer data structure (and taking a few SQL courses). > > Am I misguided? > Theres database and application systems (literally everywhere on the web IMO) where people think that throwing extra hardware at a problem will solve what proper caching solutions would achieve with no upgrades at all. IMO, for most things "web", data is retrieved more than it is set or modified. MV's will always perform better caching a query result, than a query (VIEW) and MV's and tablespaces seem to be made for each other. As for proper data structures, for whatever reason (migrating, upgrading, maintaining) really bad query code exists (including mine). Jules. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
