From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Stosberg <mark(at)summersault(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: application of KNN code to US zipcode searches? |
Date: | 2011-02-17 19:17:17 |
Message-ID: | 13093.1297970237@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Mark Stosberg <mark(at)summersault(dot)com> writes:
> - The query planner didn't like it when the "ORDER BY" referred to a
> column value instead of a static value, even when I believe it should
> know that the column value never changes. See this pseudo-query where
> we look-up the coordinates for 90210 once:
> EXPLAIN ANALYZE
> SELECT pets.pet_id,
> zipcodes.lon_lat <-> center.lon_lat AS radius
> FROM (SELECT lon_lat FROM zipcodes WHERE zipcode = '90210') AS
> center, pets
> JOIN shelters USING (shelter_id)
> JOIN zipcodes USING (zipcode)
> ORDER BY postal_codes.lon_lat <-> center.lon_lat limit 1000;
As phrased, that's a join condition, so there's no way that an index on
a single table can possibly satisfy it. You could probably convert it
to a sub-select though:
ORDER BY postal_codes.lon_lat <-> (SELECT lon_lat FROM zipcodes WHERE zipcode = '90210') limit 1000;
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2011-02-17 20:17:52 | Re: application of KNN code to US zipcode searches? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-17 19:13:05 | Re: application of KNN code to US zipcode searches? |