Re: Generic Q about max(id) vs ORDER BY ID DESC LIMIT 1
| От | Douglas McNaught |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Generic Q about max(id) vs ORDER BY ID DESC LIMIT 1 |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | m2hdb6o7r7.fsf@Douglas-McNaughts-Powerbook.local обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Generic Q about max(id) vs ORDER BY ID DESC LIMIT 1 (felix@crowfix.com) |
| Ответы |
Re: Generic Q about max(id) vs ORDER BY ID DESC LIMIT 1
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
felix@crowfix.com writes: > However, in the process of investigating this, my boss found something > which we do not understand. A table with a primary key 'id' takes 200 > seconds to SELECT MAX(id), but is as close to instantaneous as you'd > want for SELECT ID ORDER BY ID DESC LIMIT 1. I understand why > count(*) has to traverse all records, but why does MAX have to? This > table has about 750,000 rows, rather puny. As I understand it, because aggregates in PG are extensible (the query planner just knows it's calling some function), MAX isn't specially handled--the planner doesn't know it's equivalent to the other query. There has been some talk of special-casing this, but I'm not sure where it lead--you might check the archives. -Doug
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: