| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su> |
| Cc: | <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: contrib/tree |
| Date: | 2002-01-26 19:07:36 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.30.0201261406000.688-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Oleg Bartunov writes:
> does your approach handle directed graphs ( DAG ) ?
> Actually our module is just a result of our research for new
> data type which could handle DAGs ( yahoo, dmoz -like hierarchies)
> effectively in PostgreSQL.
> While we didn't find a solution we decided to release this module
> because 64 children would quite ok for many people.
> Of course, 128 would be better :-)
I was under the impression that the typical way to handle tree structures
in relational databases was with recursive unions. It's probably
infinitely slower than stuffing everything into one datum, but it gets you
all the flexibility that the DBMS has to offer.
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Don Baccus | 2002-01-26 19:25:13 | Re: contrib/tree |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-26 17:52:34 | Re: Theory about XLogFlush startup failures |