Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key.
| От | Jesper Krogh |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4DA0AB2B.9050408@krogh.cc обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Evaluation of secondary sort key. (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2011-04-09 20:00, David Fetter wrote: > Given the horrors query generators perpetrate, it might be worth > dropping provably redundant ORDER BYs on the floor at planning time. Well, many people often add a secondary sort-key to their SQL for the only purpose of obtainting a consistent result in the corner-cases where the first sort key is ambiguios. If the first sort-key isn't planned to be supported by an index-scan, then you'll end up calculating the second sortkey for the entire dataset even if you end up doing a "limit 100" at the end. You can only deem it redundant if there is a primary key in front. if you have a primary key in front, where as a fix may be really good in cases where you have a "n_distinct" at or near -1 in pg_stats for the column. Jesper -- Jesper
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: