| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Order by optimisations? |
| Date: | 2005-07-15 02:39:37 |
| Message-ID: | 42D721E9.8090906@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>>Does it know that the input to the sort routine is already sorted and
>>>hence is a no-op?
>
>
>>Yes
>
>
> No, but in most cases this will use an index and hence will assume that
> the index is responsible for ordering.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-07-15 02:40:39 | Re: Order by optimisations? |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-07-15 02:36:00 | Re: Order by optimisations? |