Re: Improving performance of a query

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Merlin Moncure <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
Cc: Carlos Benkendorf <carlosbenkendorf(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)br>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Improving performance of a query
Date: 2005-09-06 14:09:08
Message-ID: 20050906070119.K35524@megazone.bigpanda.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Merlin Moncure wrote:

> Carlos wrote:
> SELECT * FROM SSIRRA where
> (YEAR = 2004 and CUSTOMER = 0000000004 and CODE = 00 and PART >= 00) or
> (YEAR = 2004 and CUSTOMER = 0000000004 and CODE > 00) or
> (YEAR = 2004 and CUSTOMER > 0000000004) or
> (YEAR > 2004)
> [snip]
>
> ah, the positional query. You can always rewrite this query in the
> following form:
>
> (YEAR >= 2004) and
> (YEAR = 2004 or CUSTOMER >= 0000000004) and
> (YEAR = 2004 or CUSTOMER = 0000000004 or CODE >= 00) and
> (YEAR = 2004 or CUSTOMER = 0000000004 or CODE = 00 or PART > 00)

Unless I'm not seeing something, I don't think that's a correct
reformulation in general. If customer < 4 and year > 2004 the original
clause would return true but the reformulation would return false since
(year=2004 or customer >= 4) would be false.

In response to

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc Cousin 2005-09-06 14:12:27 insert performance for win32
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2005-09-06 12:59:46 Re: Improving performance of a query