From: | cbbrowne(at)cbbrowne(dot)com |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: A fairly obvious optimization? |
Date: | 2002-06-24 18:03:48 |
Message-ID: | 20020624180348.6208833138@cbbrowne.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 23 Jun 2002 17:16:09 EDT, the world broke into rejoicing as
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> said:
> FAQ updated in section 4.8: My queries are slow or don't make use of the
> indexes. Why?
>
> is returned. In fact, though MAX() and MIN() don't use indexes,
> it is possible to retrieve such values using an index with ORDER BY
> and LIMIT:
> <PRE>
> SELECT col
> FROM tab
> ORDER BY col
> LIMIT 1
> </PRE>
This sounds like the sort of thing that would be really nice to be able
to automate into the query optimizer...
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "moc.enworbbc@" "sirhc"))
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/spreadsheets.html
"I decry the current tendency to seek patents on algorithms. There
are better ways to earn a living than to prevent other people from
making use of one's contributions to computer science."
-- D. E. Knuth
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Oliver Teuber | 2002-06-24 19:48:05 | Alter ALTER TABLE statement ... |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-06-24 17:11:01 | Re: Index Scans become Seq Scans after VACUUM ANALYSE |