From: | Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | sthomas(at)peak6(dot)com |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Svetlin Manavski <svetlin(dot)manavski(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: seq scan in the case of max() on the primary key column |
Date: | 2011-06-22 09:55:46 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTim5saGCxhLCAx4nEUQ4tZuOSy65fg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 21:36, Shaun Thomas <sthomas(at)peak6(dot)com> wrote:
> You can call that instead of max, and it'll be much faster. You can create
> an analog for min if you need it. So for this, you'd call:
Cool, I've needed this function sometimes but never bothered enough to
write it myself. Now I created a wiki snippet page for this handy
feature here:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Efficient_min/max_over_partitioned_table
With Jim Nasby's idea to use regclass instead of relation names, the
function is now half its length and probably more reliable. There's no
need to touch pg_class directly at all.
I also changed it to return bigint instead of integer, as that's more
versatile, and the performance loss is probably negligible.
Regards,
Marti
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shaun Thomas | 2011-06-22 13:12:45 | Re: seq scan in the case of max() on the primary key column |
Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2011-06-22 07:05:14 | Re: Improve the Postgres Query performance |