| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Reinoud van Leeuwen <reinoud(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: optimizer question |
| Date: | 2001-10-11 21:17:04 |
| Message-ID: | 200110112117.f9BLH4N14100@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> "Reinoud van Leeuwen" <reinoud(at)xs4all(dot)nl> writes:
> > I have a table that contains almost 8 milion rows. The primary key is a
> > sequence, so the index should have a good distribution. Why does the
> > optimizer refuse to use the index for getting the maximum value?
>
> The optimizer has no idea that max() has anything to do with indexes.
> You could try something like
>
> select * from tab order by foo desc limit 1;
Can we consider doing this optimization automatically?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Patrice Hédé | 2001-10-11 21:23:36 | Re: Unicode combining characters |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-10-11 21:15:59 | Re: Proposal: new GUC paramter |