| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Incorrect behavior with CE and ORDER BY |
| Date: | 2006-10-24 17:47:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20061024174734.GM26593@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> >> We have a problem with CE that I want to verify is either expected
> >> behavior, a bug or something else :).
> >
> > Uh, what's your problem exactly? The example only seems to demonstrate
> > that if you don't ask for a sort, you don't get one.
>
> Sorry. The problem is, if I ask for an ORDER BY it scans all partitions
> versus only scanning the partition that has the data in it.
Huh, but that's not what the EXPLAIN ANALYZE you posted says ...
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2006-10-24 17:50:47 | Re: New CRC algorithm: Slicing by 8 |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-10-24 17:46:23 | Re: Incorrect behavior with CE and ORDER BY |