Re: ORDER BY and NULLs

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: mailreg(at)numerixtechnology(dot)de
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ORDER BY and NULLs
Date: 2004-09-19 18:37:11
Message-ID: 87zn3mjeaw.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql


T E Schmitz <mailreg(at)numerixtechnology(dot)de> writes:

> I just dug out the PostgreSQL book again because I thought I might've garbled
> it:
>
> Quote: "PostgreSQL will not index NULL values. Because an index will never
> include NULL values, it cannot be used to satisfy the ORDER BY clause of a
> query that returns all rows in a table."

You should just cross out that whole section. It's just flatly wrong.

I had always assumed it was just people bringing assumptions over from Oracle
where it is true. Perhaps this book is to blame for some of the confusion.
Which book is it?

Postgres indexes NULLs. It can use them for ORDER BY clauses.

Where it cannot use them is to satisfy "WHERE foo IS NULL" or "WHERE foo IS
NOT NULL" constraints though. That's an implementation detail, but it can be
worked around with partial indexes.

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-09-19 19:00:08 Re: ORDER BY and NULLs
Previous Message T E Schmitz 2004-09-19 17:18:37 Re: ORDER BY and NULLs