Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Junwang Zhao <zhjwpku(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Ajay Pal <ajay(dot)pal(dot)k(at)gmail(dot)com>, Imran Zaheer <imran(dot)zhir(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)
Date: 2025-11-25 13:58:31
Message-ID: f82ba68b-7928-4e91-aefa-90911ede4dc9@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 20.11.25 16:00, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
>> 5.
>>
>> src/backend/catalog/sql_features.txt
>>
>> +G034 Path concatenation YES SQL/PGQ required
>>
>> Do we support path concatenation?
> I don't think so. But let Peter confirm it.

AFAICT, path concatenation just allows that you can write multiple
element patterns in a row, like ()-[]->(). I don't see how it could
make sense to not support that.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2025-11-25 13:59:49 Announcing Release 20 of the PostgreSQL Build farm Client
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-11-25 13:52:21 Re: SQL Property Graph Queries (SQL/PGQ)