From: | Erwin Brandstetter <brsaweda(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | ROWS vs RANGE in release notes for pg 16 |
Date: | 2023-08-18 23:41:58 |
Message-ID: | CAGHENJ5VteqniBgrih7=gzpzLcELTpUfUNNB2PGg+Ae6o1As=g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs |
The release notes for Postgres 16 says here:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/release-16.html#RELEASE-16-PERFORMANCE
> Allow window functions to use ROWS mode internally when RANGE mode is
specified but unnecessary (David Rowley)
But the fix also applies to the much more common case where no mode has
been specified, RANGE unfortunately being the default - including the most
common use case "row_number() OVER (ORDER BY col)". This is what made me
investigate, test and eventually propose a fix in the first place. See:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAGHENJ7LBBszxS%2BSkWWFVnBmOT2oVsBhDMB1DFrgerCeYa_DyA%40mail.gmail.com
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAApHDvohAKEtTXxq7Pc-ic2dKT8oZfbRKeEJP64M0B6%2BS88z%2BA%40mail.gmail.com
Also, I was hoping to get a mention in the release note for working this
out:
> Allow window functions to use the faster ROWS mode internally when RANGE
mode is specified or would be used by default, but unnecessary (David
Rowley, Erwin Brandstetter)
Regards
Erwin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2023-08-19 01:03:12 | Re: ROWS vs RANGE in release notes for pg 16 |
Previous Message | PG Doc comments form | 2023-08-18 10:50:24 | ALTER TABLE "table" ALTER COLUMN "id" SET RESTART WITH nnn raises error |