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


From: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: "Zoltan Boszormenyi" <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "Tatsuo Ishii" <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "David Fetter" <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, "PG Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1
Date: 2008-05-19 14:22:10
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
"Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:

> From an implementation point of view, the only difference between
> breadth-first and depth-first is that your tuplestore needs to be LIFO
> instead of FIFO. 

I think it's not so simple. How do you reconcile that concept with the join
plans like merge join or hash join which expect you to be able to be able to
process the records in a specific order?

It sounds like you might have to keep around a stack of started executor nodes
or something but hopefully we can avoid anything like that because, well, ick.

  Gregory Stark
  Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Fabien COELHODate: 2008-05-19 15:01:52
Subject: Re: triggers on prepare, commit, rollback... ?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-05-19 14:10:38
Subject: Re: triggers on prepare, commit, rollback... ?

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2008-05-19 17:48:27
Subject: Re: Patch to change psql default banner v6
Previous:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2008-05-19 13:51:47
Subject: Re: WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1

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