On Sun, 2005-02-13 at 20:40 -0800, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Neil Dugan wrote:
>
> > I am using PostgreSQL 7.4.7
> > I have a table with serveral fields two of these are a serialno
> > (bigserial) and name(varchar). I have created two indexs on these
> > fields.
> > 1) on name
> > 2) on name,serialno
> > if I use the command
> > 'select * from table order by name limit 1'
> > everything is OK
> > if I use the command
> > 'select * from table order by name desc limit 1'
> > everything is OK
> > if I use the command
> > 'select * from table order by name,serialno limit 1'
> > everything is OK
> > if I use the command
> > 'select * from table order by name,serialno desc limit 1'
> > The command is SLOW and gives back the INCORRECT data.
>
> Without any example data and result, it's hard to say what you were
> expecting or got. I'd expect the highest numbered serialno record for the
> lowest sorting name from the above which is what any tests I've tried do.
>
> Right now I believe it won't consider index usage because the ordering
> asked for doesn't match either a forward ordering of the index(name,
> serialno) or a reverse order (name desc, serialno desc).
Thanks Stephan, for the hint on using desc twice.
'select * from table order by name desc,serialno desc limit 1'
does work.
I didn't realise it was separating the order into two sections, I'm
sorry if this caused any trouble for you. My mistake, bye!
