Re: Status of Hierarchical Queries

From: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)alcove(dot)com(dot)au>
To: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Status of Hierarchical Queries
Date: 2007-02-21 21:07:32
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.58.0702220753560.1389@linuxworld.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Jonah H. Harris wrote:

> As was discussed in several threads, I'd handed over the
> responsibility of hierarchical queries to Greg Stark several weeks
> ago. He posted a preliminary patch which I don't believe anyone
> looked at. For 8.3's sake, I wanted to make sure we get the status of
> this out on the table so there won't be any surprises like those
> related to 8.2.
>
> Where are we at? Has anyone reviewed the preliminary work? Any
> comments, suggestions, etc?

Yes, I looked at it.

The WITH support seems okay. I guess I'd thought it might be represented
different internally (not a sub query) but the approach Greg has taken is
probably more straight forward (in that you get a lot of proven code for
free). It should work fine for recursive queries too, if you just re-seed
the param keys for every scan of the 'sub-query'.

I wonder if anyone can think of a good way to cost the recursive side of
the query. I'm still pre-coffee and it hurts my head :).

Gavin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Phil Currier 2007-02-21 21:17:19 Re: Column storage positions
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2007-02-21 20:57:03 bug in CHECK(some SIMILAR TO ..)