Re: pgsql/src/backend/nodes (copyfuncs.c outfuncs.c print.c)

From: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql/src/backend/nodes (copyfuncs.c outfuncs.c print.c)
Date: 2000-10-27 03:11:33
Message-ID: 39F8F265.C27990D7@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Now that I look at it, the optimizer *already* prefers fast-start plans
> >> for cursors. Is LIMIT ALL really necessary as an additional hint,
> >> and if so how should it interact with the bias for cursors?
>
> > If LIMIT doesn't restrict the total count of rows which cursors
> > could return,there's no problem. Otherwise LIMIT ALL would be
> > needed.
>
> But is there a reason to treat LIMIT ALL differently from no LIMIT
> clause at all?
>

For example,LIMIT ALL means LIMIT 1 for optimizer and means
no LIMIT for executor.
Comments ?

Regards, Hiroshi Inoue.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-10-27 03:12:38 Re: pgsql (configure)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-10-27 03:05:15 Re: pgsql/src/backend/nodes (copyfuncs.c outfuncs.c print.c)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2000-10-27 03:11:34 Re: 7.0 vs. 7.1 (was: latest version?)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-10-27 03:05:15 Re: pgsql/src/backend/nodes (copyfuncs.c outfuncs.c print.c)