[Fwd: Re: SQL99 Hierarchical queries]

Looks like hierarchical queries are now officially stalled :(

Anyone want to take this up for 8.1?

Chris

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SQL99 Hierarchical queries
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 07:31:16 +0400
From: Evgen Potemkin <eugen.potemkin@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Evgen Potemkin <eugen.potemkin@gmail.com>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
References: <44458e32050224020236ac358f@mail.gmail.com>     
<42797B7C.6090502@familyhealth.com.au>

Hi,

I haven't done any significant progress on that way because of lack of
free time.
Beside this, I'm recently changed my job and now I'm woking for MySQL.
I think it's not possible for me to continue work on PostgreSQL.
Feel free to take the patch and develop it further as long as you
mention me as author of initial version.

Regards, Evgen.

On 5/5/05, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> wrote:
> Hi Evgen,
> 
> I just keep pinging this patch thread every once in a while to make sure
> it doesn't get forgotten :)
> 
> How is the syncing with 8.1 CVS coming along?
> 
> Chris
> 
> Evgen Potemkin wrote:
> > Hi hackers!
> >
> > I have done initial implementation of SQL99 WITH clause (attached).
> > It's now only for v7.3.4 and haven't a lot of checks and restrictions.
> > It can execute only simple WITH queries like
> > WITH tree AS (SELECT id,pnt,name,1::int AS level FROM t WHERE id=0
> > UNION SELECT t.id,t.pnt,t.name,tree.level+1 FROM t JOIN tree ON
> > tree.id=t.pnt ) SELECT * FROM tree;
> > It would be great if someone with knowledge of Pg internals can make a
> > kind of code review and make some advices how to better implement all
> > this.
> >
> > Regards, Evgen.
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> >       subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> >       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>