Re: WITH RECURSIVE patch V0.1

On May 19, 1:17 am, [email protected] (David Fetter) wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 12:21:20AM -0400, Gregory Stark wrote:
> > It's quite possible to have clauses which will limit the output but
> > not in a way the database can determine.  Consider for example a
> > tree-traversal for a binary tree stored in a recursive table
> > reference.  The DBA might know that the data contains no loops but
> > the database doesn't.
>
> I seem to recall Oracle's implementation can do this traversal on
> write operations, but maybe that's just their marketing.

That's how I implement (id, name, parent)-trees as a DBA, having an
insert/update trigger function check_no_loops(), but I'm not sure that
it would be faster than the hash method suggested by Hannu Krosing.  I
guess it depends on whether you're inserting/updating or selecting
more.  Does it make sense to leave the option to the user, whether to
check for infinite recursion just in time or not?

Kev

-- 
Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches