Re: Postgresql OO Patch
От | Chris Bitmead |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Postgresql OO Patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3929881E.6EF3684D@bitmead.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Postgresql OO Patch (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
While SQL3 talks about trees and leaf rows, it's not implemented like that, so all this worrying about digging down trees and leafs is all a bit mute. "Robert B. Easter" wrote: > If it were allowed, you might have to > specify the level to dig to in the tree. The rows are shared among supertable > and subtables. One row in a leaf table has subrows in all its supertables up > the tree. If you do a "SELECT * FROM supertable*" (for example, if you were to > redefine table* to mean select heterogeneous rows), what row will you get for a > row that exists in a leaf? The same row is in all tables between supertable > and the leaf. I suppose it would be necessary to have the query check each row > and see how far down the tree it goes, or the system keeps track of that and > returns the row-type from the table that inserted it. OR, there could be some > extra specifier like "SELECT * FROM supertable DIGGING TO LEVEL 3". In this > case, it would only look down into the tree to 3 levels below supertable and > you'd never get row-types that are down lower than level 3. Anyhow, I still > don't think returning multple row-types is going to happen, not that I have any > authority one way or the other! :-) > > -- > Robert B. Easter > reaster@comptechnews.com -- Chris Bitmead mailto:chris@bitmead.com http://www.techphoto.org - Photography News, Stuff that Matters
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: