Gregory Stark írta:
> This is indeed really cool. I'm sorry I haven't gotten to doing what I
> promised in this area but I'm glad it's happening anyways.
>
>
> "Zoltan Boszormenyi" <zb@cybertec.at> writes:
>
>
>> Can we get the rows in tree order, please?
>> ...
>> After all, I didn't specify any ORDER BY clauses in the base, recursive or the
>> final queries.
>>
>
> The standard has a clause to specify depth-first order. However doing a
> depth-first traversal would necessitate quite a different looking plan and
> it's far less obvious (to me anyways) how to do it.
>
That would be even cooler to have it implemented as well.
>> Also, it seems there are no infinite recursion detection:
>>
>> # with recursive x(level, parent, child) as (
>> select 1::integer, * from test_connect_by where parent is null
>> union all
>> select x.level + 1, base.* from test_connect_by as base, x where base.child
>> = x.child
>> ) select * from x;
>> ... it waits and waits and waits ...
>>
>
> Well, psql might wait and wait but it's actually receiving rows. A cleverer
> client should be able to deal with infinite streams of records.
>
I think it's the other way around. The server should not emit infinite
number of records.
> I think DB2 does produce a warning if there is no clause it can determine will
> bound the results. But that's not actually reliable. 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.
>
Well, a maintenance resjunk could be used like the branch column in
tablefunc::connectby().
--
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
http://www.postgresql.at/
