On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 16:48 -0600, Ryan Wells wrote:
> Since it works, my question is really more about principles: Given
> that each of the tables in question will contain tens of thousands of
> rows, is a nested join really the best way to approach this?
I don't see what's wrong with it. The planner will likely pare down
tasks to its result set before joining to the other joins (which are all
keyed on various fields from task).
I know that we have lots of joins like this scattered all over our code,
but we usually use inner joins unless there's a specific reason not to.
-Mark
