Re: parameterized limit statements

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: parameterized limit statements
Date: 2005-11-07 17:43:36
Message-ID: 21070.1131385416@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:
> The statements are invariably in form of
> select a,b,c,d from t
> where a >= $1 and
> (a > $1 or b >= $2) and
> (a > $1 or b > $2 or c >= $3) and
> (a > $1 or b > $2 or c > $3 or d > $4)
> order by a, b, c, d limit $5;
> ^^
> If I hardcode $5 to any sub-ridiculous value, I get a proper index plan.
> Does your patch assume a limit of 1 or 10% of table rows?

If it doesn't have a value for the parameter, it'll assume 10% of table
rows, which is what it's done for a long time if the LIMIT isn't
reducible to a constant.

I suspect the real issue here is that whatever you are doing doesn't
give the planner a value to use for the parameter. IIRC, at the moment
the only way that that happens is if you use the unnamed-statement
variation of the Parse/Bind/Execute protocol.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc Munro 2005-11-07 18:09:54 Odd db lockup - investigation advice wanted
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2005-11-07 17:37:17 Re: parameterized limit statements