http://dbazine.com/tropashko4.shtml

Oliver


On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:26:28 +0100, Arje Cahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's something:
> http://www.scenic-route.com/program/db/lists3.htm
> 
> -- Arj�
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eirikur Hrafnsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: woensdag 8 december 2004 16:23
> > To: Slide Developers Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: Optimizing SQL tree
> >
> >
> > Do you have any website references to that?
> >
> >
> > On 8.12.2004, at 13:58, Richard Emberson wrote:
> >
> > > Forget Mr. Celko's work on nested sets - its old stuff. Look for
> > > Vadim Tropashko's work on Farey Sequences and Continued Fractions -
> > > a much improved way of creating trees with generic SQL.
> > >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > Max Pfingsthorn wrote:
> > >> Dear Developers,
> > >> I was recently looking up different algorithms to store
> > trees in an
> > >> SQL database. I have found these very interesting articles
> > from 1996.
> > >> The author, Joe Celko, writes that trees can be
> > represented as Nested
> > >> Sets (see the first article for some explanation). I think, this
> > >> might be useful to Slide's SQL backend and the querying of
> > the WebDAV
> > >> tree. 'Recursive' searches, i.e. depth=infinity, reduce to mere
> > >> SELECTs comparing integers rather than making the DB match
> > strings.
> > >> And, with a little extra, depth=1 is also a simple SELECT.
> > However,
> > >> inserts are a bit more expensive, which would be fine,
> > however, since
> > >> in general, the WebDAV repository is not written to so often in
> > >> comparison to the reads.
> > >> What do you think about restructuring the SQL to take advantage of
> > >> this?
> > >> For complete reference on the Nested Sets, see:
> > >> http://www.dbmsmag.com/9603d06.html
> > >> http://www.dbmsmag.com/9604d06.html
> > >> http://www.dbmsmag.com/9605d06.html
> > >> http://www.dbmsmag.com/9606d06.html
> > >> In general, I am very interested in optimizing the SQL
> > backend a bit
> > >> more. I noticed that the LIMIT clause is actually emulated
> > within the
> > >> backend instead of using the SQL feature. We are using
> > MySQL behind
> > >> Slide, so that would help us a lot. What do you think about
> > >> specializing the backend(s) even more to take full
> > advantage of the
> > >> different vendor-specific implementations? Of course, maintenance
> > >> would be harder, but it sure would give performance a kick.
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Max Pfingsthorn
> > >> Hippo
> > >> Oosteinde 11
> > >> 1017WT
> > >> Amsterdam
> > >> The Netherlands
> > >>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This email message is for the sole use of the intended
> > recipient(s) and
> > > may contain confidential information.  Any unauthorized review, use,
> > > disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not
> > the intended
> > > recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
> > > copies of the original message.
> > >
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Eirikur S. Hrafnsson, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Chief Software Engineer
> > Idega Software
> > http://www.idega.com
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to