From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bob Price <rjp_email(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: how to avoid repeating expensive computation in select |
Date: | 2011-02-03 18:28:46 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=5+7dCytSDRvdpdQ4HY+JeVkBZjCm0_OjogegX@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hello
2011/2/3 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Bob Price <rjp_email(at)yahoo(dot)com> writes:
>> I would like to know if there is a way in PostgreSQL to avoid repeating an expensive computation in a SELECT where the result is needed both as a returned value and as an expression in the WHERE clause.
>
> Use a subselect. You might need OFFSET 0 to prevent the planner from
> "flattening" the subselect, eg
>
> SELECT whatever FROM
> (SELECT *, expensivefunc(value) AS score FROM mytable OFFSET 0) ss
> WHERE id LIKE '%z%' AND score > 0.5;
>
> Keep in mind that in the above formulation, expensivefunc will be
> evaluated at rows that don't pass the LIKE test. So you probably want
> to push down as much as you can into the sub-select's WHERE clause.
> The planner will not help you with that if you put in the OFFSET 0
> optimization-fence. It's a good idea to use EXPLAIN (or even better
> EXPLAIN VERBOSE, if you're using >= 8.4) to confirm that you're getting
> the plan you want.
What about to increase a COST value? Can it help?
Regards
Pavel
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alan Hodgson | 2011-02-03 18:50:51 | Re: upgrade |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-03 18:16:44 | Re: how to avoid repeating expensive computation in select |