> Why are you using that query rather than the one that Rik pointed you
> to?

Because the query that Rik pointed me to, has a limited number of
levels.

On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:32:17 +0200, João Morais <jcsmorais@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> Why are you using that query rather than the one that Rik pointed you
>> to?
>
> Because the query that Rik pointed me to, has a limited number of
> levels.


.... which is an unavoidable result from using the adjacency model. If your
levels are limited, it's prefectly allright to use such a construct and a
limited query. If you want both unlimited levels and a properly formated
tree without recursive queries the nested set model is the only way to go
that I know of.

sorting by id as in your attempt doesn't make any sense at all BTW. It
just 'happens' to be close to what you want.
--
Rik Wasmus

> ... which is an unavoidable result from using the adjacency model.
While reading this thread (http://groups.google.pt/group/
comp.databases.mysql/browse_thread/thread/8292ae5b5ed55287/
d4da3530d6fb8f53?hl=pt-PT&lnk=gst&q=child+and
+parent&rnum=1#d4da3530d6fb8f53)
I got the ideia that it could be done in a different way.


> If your levels are limited, it's prefectly allright to use such a construct and a limited query.
Well what I was trying to do, was to have no predefined number of
levels, but since this script will be used in a menu manager, it wont
matter that much since most of the sites have 3/4 levels of menus.


> sorting by id as in your attempt doesn't make any sense at all BTW. It
> just 'happens' to be close to what you want.
You're right mate, my bad, I was getting confused and had the *stupid*
idea to try that out.

Finally it's working now, i adopted the adjacency model.

Thanks a lot for your .