Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: How to represent a tree-structure in a relationaldatabase

From: miguel sofer <mig(at)utdt(dot)edu>
To: Alvar Freude <alvar(dot)freude(at)merz-akademie(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: How to represent a tree-structure in a relationaldatabase
Date: 2000-12-15 12:13:08
Message-ID: 20001215.12130800@ant.utdt (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-sql
> > I once started writing a small paper on this subject; it is still in a
> > rather preliminary state.
> >
> > You can download the draft (and some ill documented code, 53kB) from
> >

> ah, this looks very, very nice!


> on page 5ff you describe the Postgres implementation, but the URL (page
> 5 bottom) is't complete -- can i find the files somewhere?
> Included is a "tree_general.sql", but this seems not to be complete and
> not the same version as the ps-file (First draft, may 6, 2000): in the
> draft there is written about an base 160 encoding, tree_general.sql uses
> base 159 encoding ;)

Sorry, I never got around to completing this, or thinking any further. My 
other files are definitely not in a usable state right now. I hope to be 
to improve things over the (southern) summer holidays, so there may be 
soon - but do not hold your breadth!

I can't remember why I switched from base 160 to base 159; my guess now 
is that 
I got confused at coding time between the base and the maximal number 
ie, it may be a mistake.

> What's against using all characters >= 32, excluding special characters
> with special meaning in LIKE and regexps? With base 208 encoding it's
> possible to have 43264 elements on each level.

Nothing, I guess. I probably got some kind of "start counting at zero" 
blockage when I started, and never really looked back on it, my shame. 
Hey, I told you it was rather preliminary ... Thanks for pointing it out.

> i guess, with base 160 encoding there might be a problem: if postgres is
> compiled with --enable-locale (e.g. for german umlauts), the ordering
> isn't according to the ASCII number of the character, so for this
> purpose it's needed to build the encoding table according to the locate
> settings. Or simply sort it according the locale settings.

Yes indeed; never thought about that one.



In response to


pgsql-sql by date

Next:From: Alessio BragadiniDate: 2000-12-15 12:23:40
Subject: Confused by timezones
Previous:From: Karel ZakDate: 2000-12-15 10:49:47
Subject: Re: to_timestamp, problem

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group