Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723
Date: 2008-07-28 18:49:01
Message-ID: 25697.1217270941@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom> That whole business of using the EState to pass tuplestores back
> Tom> and forth looks fundamentally broken to me anyway; there's just
> Tom> no way it'll be certain to link the right nodes together in
> Tom> complicated cases with multiple recursions.

> Mutual recursion is not allowed;

Well, the spec allows it, so we're going to have to fix this kluge
sooner or later, even if it chances not to fail on the subset we
currently support.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2008-07-28 18:57:16 Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723
Previous Message Andrew Garner 2008-07-28 18:36:13 Re: Protocol 3, Execute, maxrows to return, impact?

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Gierth 2008-07-28 18:57:16 Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723
Previous Message Andrew Gierth 2008-07-28 17:39:33 Re: WITH RECUSIVE patches 0723