Re: pointers on representing tree in db?

"Steve Long" <steven.long_at_erols.com> wrote in message news:9bs3dp$6kf$1_at_bob.news.rcn.net...
>
> "Lennart Jonsson" <lennart_at_kommunicera.umea.se> wrote in message
> news:5ObE6.5202$D4.531477_at_www.newsranger.com...
> > In article <9bqo1s$6gk$1_at_bob.news.rcn.net>, Steve Long says...
> > >
> > >keep in mind "space vs time". the more efficient the storage, the more
> > >processing required to retrieve data. "walking the tree" will be very
> > >process intensive with such a simple representation.
> >
> > Agreed, luckily my buisness doesnt require "walks" in the tree. The
 basic
 needs
> > are typically: gimmie the children of the current node, search the
 current
 nodes
> > subtree for nodes that matches condition... and track a node back to
 another
> > node.
> >
> > /Lennart
> >
> >
> your "basic needs" are, in fact, tree walks. obtaining children and back
> tracking means walking the tree.
>

Right, and for my tree "walks" you suggest that I should use a more complex storage structure which would reduce the processing time to locate nodes?

/Lennart Received on Sat Apr 21 2001 - 19:33:08 CEST