Nested sets performance ?
From: Simon Clifton <simonclifton_at_planet9.co.uk>
Date: 7 Feb 2002 03:38:58 -0800
Message-ID: <ac5e4ae2.0202070338.541dda8f_at_posting.google.com>
I have been using the nested sets example (thanks --CELKO--) on relatively small amounts of data.
Date: 7 Feb 2002 03:38:58 -0800
Message-ID: <ac5e4ae2.0202070338.541dda8f_at_posting.google.com>
I have been using the nested sets example (thanks --CELKO--) on relatively small amounts of data.
As I understand, every insertion into the tree involves updating every other node to the right. I fear that a simple row insertion on a record set for large volumes of data will impair performance. Performance is directly related to the number of rows.
Using the adjacency list model will only require adding a row with parent relationship. But, perhaps not as efficient for building my tree.
I am wondering whether I can sub-divide my tree by some branch id. So in essence have several trees acting as one big tree. That way adding a node will only result in updates to the relevant sub-tree.
Help. Any advice on high-performance binary trees would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers
Simon.
Received on Thu Feb 07 2002 - 12:38:58 CET