From: | Achilleus Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
Cc: | email lists <lists(at)darrenmackay(dot)com>, <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: query not using index for descending records? |
Date: | 2004-01-29 15:01:43 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0401291657210.10019-100000@matrix.gatewaynet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
O kyrios Bruno Wolff III egrapse stis Jan 29, 2004 :
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 15:29:11 +0200,
> Achilleus Mantzios <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com> wrote:
> > O kyrios Bruno Wolff III egrapse stis Jan 29, 2004 :
> >
> > As i see there was a thread
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-05/msg00762.php
> > dealing with this issue, assuming the "correct" order by
> > should be "order by datetime ASC, id DESC".
>
> So you really didn't want them in the reverse order?
I am not the initiator of this thread,
i was just lurking :)
>
> > Do you know of any progress for declaring the direction of each
> > column in a multicolumn index?
>
> If you are using 7.4 you can use a functional index to get around this.
> Assuming id is a numeric type, you can make an index on datetime and
> (-id) and sort by datetime, -id and the index should get used.
>
> This should still get fixed at some point, as this trick doesn't work
> for types for which the - operator exists. But I haven't heard of
> anyone working on it for 7.5, so don't expect a real fix any time soon.
>
It would be nice to have this feature for varchar as well.
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
>
--
-Achilleus
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Travers | 2004-01-29 15:01:59 | How to retrieve N lines of a text field. |
Previous Message | MUKTA | 2004-01-29 14:15:34 | Re: |