Re: Hirarchical queries a la Oracle. Patch.

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Evgen Potemkin <evgent(at)ns(dot)terminal(dot)ru>
Cc: "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, chester c young <chestercyoung(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Hirarchical queries a la Oracle. Patch.
Date: 2002-11-26 20:59:53
Message-ID: 1038344392.1958.15.camel@rh72.home.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Evgen Potemkin kirjutas R, 22.11.2002 kell 15:57:
> Hi there!
>
> Patch is posted to pgsql-patches. docs inside.

It would of course be nice to support both Oracle and ISO/ANSI syntaxes,
but I'm afraid that the (+) may clash with our overloadable operators
feature.

> SQL 99 version will be later.

I attach a railroad diagram of SQL99 "WITH RECURSIVE" and a diff against
mid-summer gram.y which implements half of SQL99 _syntax_ (just the WITH
{RECURSIVE} part, SEARCH (tree search order order) and CYCLE (recursion
control) clauses are missing).

WITH clause seems to be quite useful in its own right as well, not just
for recursive queries, so I guess that someone with good knwledge of
postgresql internals could get plain WITH working quite fast -

The main difference between subqueries defined in WITH clause and in
FROM clause is that while subqueries in FROM don't see each other in
their namespaces, the ones in WITH either see all preceeding ones (plain
with) or just all in WITH clause (WITH RECURSIVE)

--------------
Hannu

Attachment Content-Type Size
image/gif 14.6 KB
with.clause.diff text/plain 2.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2002-11-26 21:05:48 Re: Why an array in pg_group?
Previous Message scott.marlowe 2002-11-26 20:40:54 Re: [mail] Re: Native Win32 sources