Comparison Between Full Refresh and Incremental Refresh

**Table 1** Comparison between full refresh and incremental refresh
Dimension	Full Refresh	Incremental Refresh
Base table type	Internal table, foreign table, ordinary view, and materialized view	Internal table and materialized view
Query constraint	None	Supported: agg, join, where, group by, and having Not supported: subquery, union all, window agg, and CTE
Storage format	Row and column storage	Row and column storage
Table partitioning	Supported	Supported
Query rewriting	Supported	Supported
Refresh Interval	Days and hours	Minutes and seconds
Refresh cost	Data volume in the base tables	Increment size and calculation complexity
elastic computing	Supported	Supported

**Table 2** How to select full refresh and incremental refresh
Dimension	Full Refresh	Incremental Refresh
Basic constraint	Incremental SQL statements are not supported.	All SQL statements are supported.
Base table change	The frequency is low. Batch updates or DDL operations are frequently performed.	The frequency is high and only a small amount of data (less than 30%) is modified.
Timeliness	The most recent data is read in days or hours.	The most recent data is read in minutes or seconds.
SQL complexity	The SQL statements are complex, slowing down the incremental refresh process.	The SQL statements are simple, ensuring that the incremental refresh process is not compromised.

Thank you very much for your feedback. We will continue working to improve the documentation.See the reply and handling status in My Cloud VOC.

The system is busy. Please try again later.

For any further questions, feel free to contact us through the chatbot.