Ann W. Harrison wrote:

>At 05:03 AM 9/18/2004, Alexander Klenin wrote:
>
>
>
>>>and because their are either performance burdens
>>>to the underlying tables, or horribly inconsistent.
>>>
>>>
>>Well, the fact that Oracle's implementation is perhaps
>>suboptimal does not, in itself, mean that Firebird is
>>unable to do better ;)
>>
>>
>
>OK. Should a materialized view track changes to the
>underlying table or is it a static snapshot of their
>one time state?
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Ann
>
>

Ann,

AFAIR one can put a refresh time on create materialized view (or
Snapshot) on Oracle , so the view is automatically update each
hour/day/minute/etc, could be done on tables updates, etc.

But once upon a time, when I have developed for Oracle the DBA's could
not make it update automatically, they run a batch each day if I recall
correct, can't remember if it was for performance reasons.

There are plenty of options of how to update one...

The intention is to work the Oracle way ?

The full specification of Oracle's Materialized Views/Snapshots are here
(for those that don't have it at hand):
https://cwisdb.cc.kuleuven.ac.be/ora10doc/server.101/b10759/statements_6002.htm


I think this is so much complex to be implemented at once....

see you !

--

Alexandre Benson Smith
Development
THOR Software e Comercial Ltda.
Santo Andre - Sao Paulo - Brazil
www.thorsoftware.com.br