| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #5358: Throwing unexpected ERROR |
| Date: | 2010-03-03 13:37:49 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f071003030537i212f5483m5dd24da4ac331aaf@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I just realized that it is the subquery pull-up that is leading to this
> problem, not predicate push-down. Sleeping over it does really help I guess
> :)
>
> So instead of the LIMIT 1000, OFFSET 0 clause is the right choice for
> preventing subquery pull-up without affecting the results.
>
> I don't think the optimizer has the push-down capabiity; I may be wrong.
Maybe I'm just dense, but I don't understand what you're complaining
about here. The SELECT DISTINCT already acts as an optimization
fence, so why would you need another one? And what problem would you
expect it to solve?
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2010-03-03 13:48:28 | Re: BUG #5358: Throwing unexpected ERROR |
| Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2010-03-03 12:29:30 | Re: BUG #5358: Throwing unexpected ERROR |