From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Tatsuo Ishii" <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostGreSQL and recursive queries... |
Date: | 2007-11-30 15:49:34 |
Message-ID: | 87y7cf3f8x.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>> I could imagine problems the planner would have to deal with though, such as
>> what type is "bogon" in this query?
>
>> WITH RECURSIVE x(bogon) AS (select bogon from x) select * from x;
>
> Just a note --- that's not the planner's problem, either. Semantic
> interpretation of the meaning of a query is supposed to be completed
> during parse analysis.
I was being sloppy. I just mean as opposed to the executor. Ie, that the code
to build the plan is harder than actually running it.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-11-30 17:15:24 | Re: CommandCounterIncrement versus plan caching |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2007-11-30 15:48:11 | Re: .NET or Mono functions in PG |