Re: [HACKERS] About connectby() again

2002-10-03 Thread Bruce Momjian
Patch applied. Thanks. --- Joe Conway wrote: Masaru Sugawara wrote: The previous patch fixed an infinite recursion bug in contrib/tablefunc/tablefunc.c:connectby. But, other unmanageable error seems to occur even

Re: [HACKERS] About connectby() again

2002-09-27 Thread Masaru Sugawara
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 16:32:08 -0700 Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Masaru Sugawara wrote: The previous patch fixed an infinite recursion bug in contrib/tablefunc/tablefunc.c:connectby. But, other unmanageable error seems to occur even if a table has commonplace tree data(see below).

[HACKERS] About connectby() again

2002-09-26 Thread Masaru Sugawara
On Sat, 07 Sep 2002 10:21:21 -0700 Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just sent in a patch using the ancestor check method. It turned out that the performance hit was pretty small on a moderate sized tree. My test case was a 22 record bill-of-material table. The tree built was 9

Re: [HACKERS] About connectby() again

2002-09-26 Thread Masaru Sugawara
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002 02:02:49 +0900 I wrote [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 07 Sep 2002 10:21:21 -0700 Joe Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just sent in a patch using the ancestor check method. It turned out that the performance hit was pretty small on a moderate sized tree. My

Re: [HACKERS] About connectby() again

2002-09-26 Thread Joe Conway
Masaru Sugawara wrote: The previous patch fixed an infinite recursion bug in contrib/tablefunc/tablefunc.c:connectby. But, other unmanageable error seems to occur even if a table has commonplace tree data(see below). I would think the patch, ancestor check, should be if