Re: Query question

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> The only thing you're adding to the query is a second SORT step, so it
> shouldn't require any more time/memory than the query's first SORT
> did.

Interesting -- I wonder if it would be possible for the optimizer to
detect this and avoid the redundant inner sort ... (/me muses to
himself)

-Neil