From: | Tim Hart <tjhart(at)me(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | General subselect question |
Date: | 2008-12-31 22:57:37 |
Message-ID: | 3DF03291-82D2-4680-BF67-2DE3BAF5F177@me.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
In the general case, is a subselect that uses union less performant
than a union?
I have a query that looks something like this:
select <some columns>
from table1,
table2,
table3
where <where clause>
union
select <select clause>
from table1,
table2,
table3 ref1,
table3 ref2
where <where clause>
I realized today that I could convert the query to
select <some columns>
from table1,
table2,
( select <some columns>
from table3
where <where clause>
union
select <some columns>
from table3 ref1,
table3 ref2
where <where clause> )
where <where clause>
For my specific case, I'll use EXPLAIN to determine the performance
difference. I'll weigh the performance benefits with the maintenance
benefits ( less duplication of code for me on the second case) and
decide (assuming I'm still motivated on Friday ;) ).
But in the general case, do I have to pay special attention with
unions in subselects?
Tim Hart
615-713-9956 :cell
timothyjhart :Y!
tjhart(at)me(dot)com :AIM
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | George Pavlov | 2009-01-01 01:21:32 | Re: pg_restore question (-T and -t) |
Previous Message | Tony Caduto | 2008-12-31 21:49:39 | pg_restore question (-T and -t) |