| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Bypassing useless ORDER BY in a VIEW |
| Date: | 2008-02-28 21:52:15 |
| Message-ID: | 16851.1204235535@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Dean Gibson (DB Administrator)" <postgresql(at)ultimeth(dot)com> writes:
> Of course, where ORDER BY in a VIEW is really helpful, is with OFFSET
> and/or LIMIT clauses (which are also PostgreSQL extensions), which is
> equivalent to what you point out.
Right, which is the main reason why we allow it. I think that these
are sort of poor man's cases of things that SQL2003 covers with
"windowing functions".
The SQL spec treats ORDER BY as a cosmetic thing that you can slap onto
the final output of a SELECT. They don't consider it useful in
subqueries (including views) because row ordering is never supposed to
be a semantically significant aspect of a set of rows.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Franck Routier | 2008-02-29 11:51:34 | 12 disks raid setup |
| Previous Message | Dean Gibson (DB Administrator) | 2008-02-28 18:09:50 | Re: Bypassing useless ORDER BY in a VIEW |