From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bertram Scharpf <lists(at)bertram-scharpf(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Wrote a connect-by feature |
Date: | 2007-08-11 15:01:21 |
Message-ID: | 46BDCF41.4010401@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Bertram Scharpf wrote:
>>>> Wouldn't the release be a good opportunity for providing
>>>> this little tool?
>
>> As for whether we could accept this for 8.4, I thought the general
>> consensus was that we should implement the SQL-spec WITH syntax.
>> The only good reason for supporting CONNECT BY would be to be
>> Oracle-compatible, which this patch isn't. (Being Oracle-compatible
>> isn't necessarily good anyway; are we sure they don't have a patent
>> on their way of doing this?)
>
> I believe this patch is an update to the table_funcs contrib module.
I guess I should weigh in here. I have to agree with Tom, namely that:
1. It is way to late for a massive change to the existing contrib for
Postgres 8.3
2. Any effort involving significant changes to this functionality ought
to be directed at getting SQL spec compliant recursive behavior
rather than extending the existing hack.
For those reasons, I for one was not too excited to spend much time
right now reviewing the patch.
If Bertram would send a narrow patch that just plugged existing bugs,
I'd be all ears. It would likely be applied to 8.3 and possibly earlier.
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-08-11 15:27:33 | Re: Wrote a connect-by feature |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2007-08-11 14:52:40 | Re: Wrote a connect-by feature |