I haven't had any problems with it so far, although I haven't really stressed it yet. I was going to make this very plea...
I agree that the syntax can probably be improved, but its familiar to those of us unfortunate enough to have used (or still have to use)
Oracle. I imagine that bringing it more in line with any standard would be what people would prefer.
On Feb 4, 2004, at 5:28 AM, Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote:
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:--------------------There is a website somewhere where a guy posts his patch he is maintaining that does it. I'll try to find it...Found it. Check it out: http://gppl.terminal.ru/index.eng.html Patch is current for 7.4, Oracle syntax. Chris
I had a look at the patch.
It is still in development but it seems to work nicely - at least I have been able to get the same results with Oracle.
I will try it with a lot of data this afternoon so that we can compare Oracle vs. Pg performance. I expect horrible results ;).
Does this patch have a serious chance to make it into Pg some day?
I think Oracle's syntax is not perfect but is easy to handle and many people are used to it. In people's mind recursive queries = CONNECT BY and many people (like me) miss it sadly.
If this patch has a serious chance I'd like to do some investigation and some real-world data testing.
Regards,
Hans
-- Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig Schoengrabern 134, A-2020 Hollabrunn, Austria Tel: +43/2952/30706 or +43/664/233 90 75 www.cybertec.at, www.postgresql.at, kernel.cybertec.at
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Andrew Rawnsley President The Ravensfield Digital Resource Group, Ltd. (740) 587-0114 www.ravensfield.com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
