Re: Simple SQL Question

From: Andras Kutrovics <n-drew(at)freemail(dot)hu>
To: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Simple SQL Question
Date: 2004-11-09 09:16:22
Message-ID: 41908AE6.80202@freemail.hu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Franco Bruno Borghesi wrote:

Hi!

Sorry for being late with the answer, I was busy at one of our customer;)

> wouldn't it be easier using offset & limit?: you always select from the
> table with an itemkey,location order by clause. You save the current
> offset between requests, and for every request you re-execute the query
> with a different offset.
Sure, but sometimes I have to query by name, and dont want to create
another query component.

> If you still want to go with what you already have, you should keep the
> lastItemKey and lastLocaltion values between requests, and your where
> clause should be something like:
> WHERE (itemKey=:lastItemKey AND location>:lastLocation) OR
> (itemKey>:lastItemKey)

It works perfectly, but I have to consider the performance issue,
because if i use 'or' statement, postgres doesn't use index scan,
and I also have tables with 3 or more keys and 500.000 records ,
where
the performance of this method is poor.
Maybe I will end up using limit and offset in case of incremental
fetching,but if the table is modified between requests, it can behave
weird.
Is there a perfect solution to this?

Sorry for the english

Thank you again,

Andras Kutrovics

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message marc ratun 2004-11-09 10:41:54 INSERT INTO VIEW - Replacement
Previous Message Andrei Bintintan 2004-11-09 08:47:06 A transaction in transaction? Possible?