Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
If I am expecting my table to have say, 700,000 rows,
A user can be a vanilla signup (starting a brand new tree)
or
A user can be a invited signup (starting a new branch on an existing tree).
If we are expecting these trees to get, on average, 800 nodes from the first node,
Are Materialized paths practical, and at what point do they become impractical?
In my experience, they start to be cumbersome when sub-trees grow in the order of 10k nodes (depends on your sub-sub-trees, etc., arguably).
Note, as an aside, that if you switched to PostgreSQL, you could use the ltree contrib to manage your tree paths directly. In the latter case I’ve never managed to break it. (As in, managed to introduce material performance problems.)