Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> If you want both the max and the min, then things are going to be a bit
> more work. You are either going to want to do two separate selects
> or join two selects or use subselects. If there aren't enough prices
> per stock, the sequential scan might be fastest since you only need to
> go through the table once and don't have to hit the index blocks.
> It is still odd that you didn't get a big speed up for just the min though.
I found I'm suffering from an effect detailed in a previous thread titled
Does "correlation" mislead the optimizer on large tables?
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2003-08-29 16:18:35|
|Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL functions - text / varchar - havy performance |
|Previous:||From: Andrew Sullivan||Date: 2003-08-29 15:54:01|
|Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL functions - text / varchar - havy performance|