Re: optimising UNION performance - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Rafal Pietrak
Subject Re: optimising UNION performance
Date
Msg-id 1156803428.18132.23.camel@zorro.isa-geek.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: optimising UNION performance  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
This is a little strange - my response to this post apparently got lost
in the net?? I haven't received it back through the list nor it's
visible in the archieve. Yet, my exim logfile contains entry indicating
'delivery complited'???

But to the point.

All the EXPLAIN ANALISE I did on posggres v8.1.4 - plain *.deb binary
install from debian network repository.

So if version v8.1 was expected to behave any differently, it doesn't.
But may be the reduction improvement are in some pre-8.2 versions?

-R

On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 10:46 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alban Hertroys <alban@magproductions.nl> writes:
> > There's practically no difference between SELECT 1 FROM ... and SELECT *
> > FROM ...; the only added costs (AFAIK) are for actually fetching the
> > column values and such. Pretty cheap operations.
>
> You're both glossing over exactly the wrong thing, particularly seeing
> that Rafal appears to be using 8.0 or older which hasn't got 8.1's
> significant reductions in targetlist evaluation costs.
>
>             regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
--
-R

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Markus Schiltknecht
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgresql mentioned on Newsforge MySQL article
Next
From: Ron Johnson
Date:
Subject: Re: Precision of data types and functions