Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key.
| От | David Fetter |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20110409161710.GA1464@fetter.org обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Evaluation of secondary sort key. (Jesper Krogh <jesper@krogh.cc>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key.
Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key. Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key. |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Apr 09, 2011 at 03:22:14PM +0200, Jesper Krogh wrote: > This seems like a place where there is room for improvement. > > 2011-04-09 15:18:08.016 testdb=# select id from test1 where id < 3 > order by id; > id > ---- > 1 > 2 > (2 rows) > > Time: 0.328 ms > 2011-04-09 15:18:11.936 testdb=# CREATE or Replace FUNCTION > testsort(id integer) returns integer as $$ BEGIN perform > pg_sleep(id); return id; END; $$ language plpgsql; > CREATE FUNCTION > Time: 12.349 ms > 2011-04-09 15:18:22.138 testdb=# select id from test1 where id < 3 > order by id,testsort(id); > id > ---- > 1 > 2 > (2 rows) > > Time: 3001.896 ms > > It seems strange that there is a need to evaluate testsort(id) at > all in this case. How would PostgreSQL know that sorting by id leaves no ambiguity for the next key to address? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: