Re: sequential scan result order vs performance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From ilmari@ilmari.org (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker)
Subject Re: sequential scan result order vs performance
Date
Msg-id d8jk2cordsg.fsf@dalvik.ping.uio.no
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: sequential scan result order vs performance  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com> writes:

> BTW, I've sometimes wished for a mode where queries would silently have
> result ordering intentionally futzed, to eliminate any possibility of
> dependence on tuple ordering (as well as having sequences start at some
> random value).

FWIW, SQLite has this, in the form of 'PRAGMA reverse_unordered_selects'.

http://sqlite.org/pragma.html#pragma_reverse_unordered_selects

-- 
"The surreality of the universe tends towards a maximum" -- Skud's Law
"Never formulate a law or axiom that you're not prepared to live withthe consequences of."
--Skud's Meta-Law
 



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Petr Jelinek
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical Replication WIP
Next
From: Emre Hasegeli
Date:
Subject: Re: Improve output of BitmapAnd EXPLAIN ANALYZE