pg_ivm VS contour

FTA, because I don't like Jeopardy questions in headlines:

“Incremental View Maintenance (IVM) provides a method for keeping materialized views current by calculating and applying only the incremental changes, as opposed to the complete recomputation of contents performed by the REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW command.”

Article shows using the pg_ivm Postgres extension available here: https://github.com/sraoss/pg_ivm

There is an extension that provides some limited incremental MVIEW refresh: https://github.com/sraoss/pg_ivm

There’s awesome work being done on incremental view maintenance in postgres:

https://github.com/sraoss/pg_ivm

It makes sense to perform managed denormalization - use a materialized view or automatically refresh a table or foreign server (via FDW) using common triggers (like pg_ivm does). And it's fine to add a TTL to it and use as a read store... update on user login and make a partial index just for that. And that's how you could get CQRS...

have you tried Contour yet?

https://projectcontour.io

E.G. Dave Cheneys Contour https://github.com/projectcontour/contour

nginx-ingress-controller, haproxy-ingress-controller or contour-ingress-controller for ingress management.

Practically, it makes more sense to adopt GRPC services and publish them using REST/GraphQL bridges/gateways, respective API Gateways (I prefer Contour). Those have some AAA requirements and limitations on their own, and shape the design for everything else, including observability and service delivery (i.e. blue green vs canary).