X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E5609FA506 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:42:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 50720-02 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:42:19 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.172]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 188389FA441 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:42:18 -0300 (ADT) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id j40so445598ugd for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 12:42:17 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=gjGLpscfesM7Lq5zDbMzy57/Q38mHGdQRMqi71LEUGiJtBsSnXa2RdejPEGcQewj4qoFGg9ETcRQ9ZJ+iHatn+kulicMf54V+Nhu+W1m3hgJZlLVOaCF0nltiYkioh3odKezYKrv4WNvRuFwYf5PGKLb6uVy8O7TUM90ydbaslk= Received: by 10.67.101.8 with SMTP id d8mr441502ugm; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 12:42:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.67.98.7 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Jul 2006 12:42:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <36e682920607131242y36446c3cvec7a6d1203043f83@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 15:42:17 -0400 From: "Jonah H. Harris" To: "Tom Lane" Subject: Re: 8.2 features? Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" , PostgreSQL-development In-Reply-To: <18897.1152819161@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44B69778.5050104@dunslane.net> <18897.1152819161@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200607/412 X-Sequence-Number: 86267 On 7/13/06, Tom Lane wrote: > > . recursive WITH queries > > I believe Jonah has given up on fixing the originally-submitted > patch, but he mentioned at the code sprint that non-recursive > WITH is potentially doable in time for 8.2. Not sure if that's > a sufficiently important case to be worth doing. A working WITH clause which will work in most usual use-cases will be submitted. -- Jonah H. Harris, Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1300 EnterpriseDB Corporation | fax: 732.331.1301 33 Wood Ave S, 2nd Floor | jharris@enterprisedb.com Iselin, New Jersey 08830 | http://www.enterprisedb.com/