From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | lirex(dot)software(at)gmail(dot)com |
Cc: | pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: BUG #7499: wrong data sorting if I use "...limit 1..." SQL clause along with "...order by ..." |
Date: | 2012-08-20 03:41:44 |
Message-ID: | 5048.1345434104@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
lirex(dot)software(at)gmail(dot)com writes:
> 3. select id, str_last_name from tbl_owners_individual order by
> str_last_name offset 53;
> ...
> 1 | Kolesnik
> 111 | Kolesnik
> 251 | XXXXXXXXXX
> 112 | XXXXX
> ...
> 4. select id, str_last_name from tbl_owners_individual order by
> str_last_name limit 1 offset 53;
> 111 | Kolesnik
This is not a bug. Your ORDER BY does not fully determine the order of
the rows (since all rows with str_last_name = 'Kolesnik' sort the same);
so Postgres is entitled to return equivalent rows in any order, or to
select any subset of the equivalent rows for a LIMIT query.
It's not completely nondeterministic, of course, but I suspect
if you examine EXPLAIN results you'll find that different query
plans got chosen for the queries with and without LIMIT.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | maxim.boguk | 2012-08-21 08:08:11 | BUG #7500: hot-standby replica crash after an initial rsync |
Previous Message | lirex.software | 2012-08-19 18:46:55 | BUG #7499: wrong data sorting if I use "...limit 1..." SQL clause along with "...order by ..." |