| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>, Oliver Teuber <teuber(at)abyss(dot)devicen(dot)de>, Matthew Kirkwood <matthew(at)hairy(dot)beasts(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: SQL COPY syntax extension (was: Performance on inserts) | 
| Date: | 2000-08-28 18:29:17 | 
| Message-ID: | 39AAAF7D.2B98B14B@tm.ee | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:
> > That syntax is a lot like a real SQL9x INSERT.
> 
> Multiple row constructors in INSERT is one of my to-do items for the
> planned querytree redesign.  I have not thought it was worth messing
> with until we're ready to bite that bullet, however.
What is the status of this querytree redesign ?
I'v spent some time trying to get a grip ofthe _exact_ meaning of the
WITH RECURSIVE syntax in SQL3/99 as I badly need it in a project of
mine.
(I know the _general_ meaning - it is for querying tree-structured data
;)
The things the new querytree should address sould be (at least ;) -
1. OUTER JOINS
2. WITH RECURSIVE
3. Support for positioned UPDATE & DELETE (requires probably lot more
than
  just querytree redesign)
4. Easyer special-casing of optimisations (like using an index on x for 
  'select max(x) from t', but not for 'select max(x) from t where n=7'
Is the special mailing-list for querytree redesing active ?
--------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-08-28 18:30:05 | Re: Re: Too many open files (was Re: spinlock problems reported earlier) | 
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2000-08-28 18:20:27 | Re: SQL COPY syntax extension (was: Performance on inserts) |