Re: Query question

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL Performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Query question
Date: 2003-11-14 16:07:15
Message-ID: 87llqjj5n0.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> The only thing you're adding to the query is a second SORT step, so it
> shouldn't require any more time/memory than the query's first SORT
> did.

Interesting -- I wonder if it would be possible for the optimizer to
detect this and avoid the redundant inner sort ... (/me muses to
himself)

-Neil

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Manfred Koizar 2003-11-14 16:35:44 Re: Seeking help with a query that takes too long
Previous Message Rajesh Kumar Mallah 2003-11-14 16:01:42 Re: IN surpasses NOT EXISTS in 7.4RC2 ??