On Aug 28, 2008, at 10:54 AM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> >> On the Query side, the basic job is to formulate joins to the parent, > > Would it no be better to the child? Otherwise you need to traverse all > records, which would be inefficient -I think- when for example only 1% > of the records are in the group. Or am I overlooking something? its all joins between X and Y so at that level its the same thing. The optimizations you'd be looking for here would involve additional tables that store information such as a full path for each node, or a materialized path view of some kind (or even, nested sets, something I should eventually create an ORM example for since it's tricky). --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
