On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 10:46:12AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 1/5/13 1:21 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> >On 21 December 2012 14:08, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >>I'm sure it's possible; I don't *think* it's terribly easy.
> >I'm inclined to agree that this isn't a terribly pressing issue.
> >Certainly, the need to introduce a bunch of new infrastructure to
> >detect this case seems hard to justify.
> Impossible to justify, I'd say.
> Does anyone have any objections to my adding this to the TODO list,
> in case some clever GSOC student comes up with a way to do it
> *without* adding a bunch of infrastructure?
I'm pretty sure the logical change stuff Andres et al. are working on
will be able to include the originating node, which makes cycle
detection dead simple.
Other restrictions on the graph like, "must be a tree" might be more
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Andres Freund||Date: 2013-01-08 20:00:22|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Make relpathbackend return a statically
result instead of palloc()'ing it|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2013-01-08 19:53:29|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] Make relpathbackend return a statically result instead of palloc()'ing it|