| From: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb(at)eskimo(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, jim(at)nasby(dot)net, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Index not being used in MAX function (7.2.3) |
| Date: | 2003-06-11 19:48:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20030611194848.GD17221@wolff.to |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Jun 11, 2003 at 11:41:26 -0700,
Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Isn't that the optimizer's job to figure out? The whole idea of SQL is
> to abstract the queries and allow the optimizer to make all the smart
> choices about plans and stuff.
In theory yes. My comment was specifically addressing the idea of using
a macro. I don't think this would work because subselects aren't
always the best way to do this.
There are other areas where how you write queries makes a big difference
in performance even though the queries are logically equivalent.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-11 19:55:30 | Re: pg_dump -> \i infile |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-06-11 19:37:18 | Re: Postgres performance comments from a MySQL user |