| From: | Carlos Benkendorf <carlosbenkendorf(at)yahoo(dot)com(dot)br> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ORDER BY costs |
| Date: | 2005-12-22 14:06:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20051222140620.81529.qmail@web35501.mail.mud.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
I´m not sure but I think the extra runtime of the select statement that has the ORDER BY clause is because the planner decided to sort the result set.
Is the sort really necessary? Why not only scanning the primary key index pages and retrieving the rows like the select without the order by clause?
Aren´t not the rows retrieved from the index in a odered form?
Thanks in advance!
Benkendorf
---------------------------------
Yahoo! doce lar. Faça do Yahoo! sua homepage.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2005-12-22 14:17:45 | Re: effizient query with jdbc |
| Previous Message | Markus Schaber | 2005-12-22 13:34:16 | Re: MySQL is faster than PgSQL but a large margin in |