Re: SQL trees and other nonsense...

From: David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com>
To: Trilobite Trilobite <trilobiteart(at)hotmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SQL trees and other nonsense...
Date: 2004-04-07 04:55:16
Message-ID: 407389B4.5070006@zara.6.isreserved.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Trilobite Trilobite wrote:
> I'm playing with tree structures in SQL. It's kinda cool and definitely
> a big hack.
>
> Anyway, there are a few things in our database that are more hierarchal
> then they are relational. The problem I'm working with is accounting,
> as in, "accounts > owners equity > expense accounts > rent > shop rent"

Since when does Expense become a subcategory of Equity? :)

Btw, trees have been discussed so many times. Peruse the archive and
you'll find many bits of wisdom...

As for meself, currently I tend to use MP (materialized path). It's
space expensive but most of my trees are not very deep and MP makes most
queries easy.

After all, NS (nested set) is a special form of MP anyway.

--
dave

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2004-04-07 04:55:21 Re: thread_test.c problems
Previous Message Joe Conway 2004-04-07 04:43:43 Re: Cursors and Transactions, why?