On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 12:34, Thomas Müller <[email protected]> wrote: > I would also use a b-tree structure. If a node has too many child > nodes, two new "invisible internal nodes" are created, and the list of > child nodes is split up. Those internal nodes wouldn't have any > properties.
You mean a b-tree for each node? I think this could be a separate index, but one for the whole tree. > If the user changes the child node order (manually re-ordered the > nodes), then the sort order is broken. Then the path lookup has to > scan through all nodes. While that's much slower, I think it's > acceptable. I think supporting fast path lookups for orderable child nodes is a bit more important than flat hierarchies, at least for CMS applications. So we should make it fast in that case as well. Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [email protected]
