Re: union optimization in views

From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: JOE <joe(at)piscitella(dot)com>, <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: union optimization in views
Date: 2002-09-03 04:06:05
Message-ID: 20020902210247.H41635-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

On Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Josh Berkus wrote:

> Joe,
>
> > We are attempting to move a couple of systems from Oracle to Postgres but
> can not do so without application rewrites due to the current use of views
> with UNIONs and the criticality of the performances of these views.
> >
> > I was wondering if a decision has been made on the optimization with the
> UNION clause in views. There are many documents in the SQL archive showing
> that the "push down" is not occuring and thus the use of UNION's in views is
> limited to case where the data set is small or performance is not a
> consideration. I also looked through the TODO list and didn't see anything
> (of course I could have missed references).
>
> I'd take this up on PGSQL-HACKERS. The UNION VIEW optimization, last I
> checked, was stalled mainly because nobody wanted to work on it. Maybe you
> can?

Tom sent a patch to -patches against then cvs head that did
union/intersect [all] push down last week. Unless someone comes
up with a complaint, I'd guess that's going to make it in 7.3

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message tp 2002-09-03 08:37:27 Re: UPDATE & LIMIT together?
Previous Message GB Clark 2002-09-02 19:57:26 Re: Retrieving the new nextval...