Hello Ann,

Monday, September 20, 2004, 7:40:43 PM, you 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?

Here's an article on how it works in Oracle 9i:
http://www.databasejournal.com/features/oracle/article.php/2192071

Whatever way you look at it, it's a snapshot of a query at one point
in time. And, this view can be refreshed in different ways, and I
would guess only with committed data(so this would probably disregard
data that was modified within the current transaction). So, this would
most likely be an extra burden on Firebird and the CPU.

--
Best regards,
Daniel Rail
Senior Software Developer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.filopto.com)