Re: [HACKERS] Solution for LIMIT cost estimation

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Cc: chris(at)bitmead(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Solution for LIMIT cost estimation
Date: 2000-02-15 00:43:45
Message-ID: 38A8A141.DDDE8548@tm.ee
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Don Baccus wrote:
>
> At 11:41 AM 2/14/00 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>Maybe we should still discourage the use of LIMIT, and rather introduce
> >another "mode" for optimiser, activated by SET FastStart TO 'ON'.
> >Then queries with limit could be rewritten into
> >SET FastStart to 'ON';
> >DECLARE
> >MOVE
> >FETCH
> >CLOSE
> >SET FastStart to PREVIOUS_VALUE;
> >
> >also maybe we will need PUSH/POP for set commands ?
>
> Well...personally I don't see LIMIT as being particularly harmful,
> and it is a convenience. Remember, for the web space you're speaking
> of keeping overhead low is a real concern, and requiring a series
> of queries where currently only one needed will probably go over like
> a lead ballon.

I meant that the _backend_ could (in some distant future, when the
optimiser is perfect :) implement LIMIT as above sequence.

---------------
Hannu

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2000-02-15 00:52:25 Re: [HACKERS] Solution for LIMIT cost estimation
Previous Message Chris Bitmead 2000-02-14 23:30:17 Re: [HACKERS] Solution for LIMIT cost estimation