From: | Ray Bannon <bannonr(at)comcast(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Union Query Improvement |
Date: | 2007-02-14 12:43:18 |
Message-ID: | C1F843E6.41D%bannonr@comcast.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
There is only one table/view, it's getting one record for each of the
hundred or so plan ID's that I'm looking for.
On 2/13/07 11:29 PM, in article 45D2BA53(dot)2010100(at)cox(dot)net, "Ron Johnson"
<ron(dot)l(dot)johnson(at)cox(dot)net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 02/13/07 07:46, Ray Bannon wrote:
>> I have a query which is running a bit slowly, and I'm wondering if anyone
>> has a design improvement. Basically it's a series of unions as follows:
>>
>> Select ID, plan_name from table/view
>> Where plan_name = 'A'
>> And rownum = 1
>> UNION
>> Select ID, plan_name from table/view
>> Where plan_name = 'B'
>> And rownum = 1
>> UNION
>> Select ID, plan_name from table/view
>> Where plan_name = 'C'
>> And rownum = 1
>> UNION
>>
>> Ad infinitum for about 100 iterations.
>>
>> Any way to write this more efficiently?
>
> Just out of curiosity: why does your(?) design have 100 tables/views
> with the same (or almost identical) structure?
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFF0rpTS9HxQb37XmcRAtH5AJ4zz5NPM5rBsNWLrKC+/Md6GhxCNgCfZBHf
> AeMbTRNKp4guK81pGwfU5wc=
> =t9y+
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rajarshi Guha | 2007-02-14 13:02:44 | Re: suggestions on improving a query |
Previous Message | Robert Grinnell | 2007-02-14 12:24:28 | Robert Grinnell is out of the office on holiday. |