| From: | Klint Gore <kg(at)kgb(dot)une(dot)edu(dot)au> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> | 
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> | 
| Subject: | Re: bad performances using hashjoin | 
| Date: | 2005-02-21 01:30:21 | 
| Message-ID: | 421939AD2A4.CE73KG@129.180.47.120 | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance | 
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 13:46:10 -0500, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> sat_request rows.  If this is the case you actually need to optimize,
> probably the thing to do is to get rid of the ORDER BY clauses you
> evidently have in your views, so that there's some chance of building
> a fast-start plan.
Is having an order by in a view legal?  In sybase ASA, mssql it throws a
syntax error if there's an order by.
If so, does it do 2 sorts when you sort by something else?
i.e. if view is 
   create view v1 as select * from table order by 1;
and the statment
   select * from v1 order by 2;
is run does it sort by 1 then resort by 2?
klint.
+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
: Klint Gore                            : "Non rhyming    :
: EMail   : kg(at)kgb(dot)une(dot)edu(dot)au           :  slang - the    :
: Snail   : A.B.R.I.                    :  possibilities  :
: Mail      University of New England   :  are useless"   :
:           Armidale NSW 2351 Australia :     L.J.J.      :
: Fax     : +61 2 6772 5376             :                 :
+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | amrit | 2005-02-21 01:34:45 | Re: Problem with 7.4.5 and webmin 1.8 in grant function | 
| Previous Message | Gaetano Mendola | 2005-02-21 00:50:18 | Re: Effects of IDLE processes |