From: | Scott Lamb <slamb(at)slamb(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Peter Hardman" <peter(at)ssbg(dot)zetnet(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL runs a query much slower than BDE and MySQL |
Date: | 2006-08-17 19:20:11 |
Message-ID: | 451A4BAB-97D2-4292-9CF9-CB6DB5B3BCD4@slamb.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
I have no idea if there's a standard name or what it may be, but for
what it's worth, this sounds similar to the optimizations I wanted
for a different query:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2005-11/msg00037.php
1. Recognize that a term constant across the whole sort is
irrelevant. (In my earlier case, a constant number, but here MAX
(xxx), which seems harder.)
2. Put together two sequences already in the appropriate order,
without resorting. (In my case, a union; here a join.)
though I no longer need them for that problem. I'm quite happy with
the client-side solution we came up with.
--
Scott Lamb <http://www.slamb.org/>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Hardman | 2006-08-17 19:58:20 | Re: PostgreSQL runs a query much slower than BDE and MySQL |
Previous Message | Scott Lamb | 2006-08-17 19:09:45 | Re: PostgreSQL runs a query much slower than BDE and MySQL |