From: | Wes Cravens <wcravens(at)cortex-it(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Returning a row from a function with an appended array field |
Date: | 2011-11-10 18:51:50 |
Message-ID: | 4EBC1D46.2080808@cortex-it.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 11/10/2011 12:05 PM, David Johnston wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-general-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Wes Cravens
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 11:54 AM
> To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Returning a row from a function with an appended
> array field
>
> On 11/9/2011 7:19 PM, Wes Cravens wrote:
>> I have an adjacency list kind of table
>>
>> CREATE TABLE thingy (
>> id int,
>> parent int
>> );
>>
>> I'd like to be able to write a procedural function that returns a row
>> or rows from this table with an appended field that represents the
> children.
>
>
> If you only care about one level of hierarchy then, yes, WITH RECURSIVE is
> overkill. You want to use WITH RECURSIVE in those situations where the
> depth of the hierarchy is unknown.
Yes agreed... WITH RECURSIVE would be handy for something like
get_ancestors or get_descendents.
Wes
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Kerr | 2011-11-10 19:24:13 | Re: Foreign Keys and Deadlocks |
Previous Message | David Johnston | 2011-11-10 18:05:54 | Re: Returning a row from a function with an appended array field |