Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 14:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Message-ID: <1405979651518-5812289.post@n5.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CACuOPqBc7kKiv4JjqQwEJO1PG7iN5XByt9-b9Di2i69k+SV5dA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CACuOPqC9h6vK5rniezSOm2fu44PNp0NrB8kdtapT=xqNzQgidA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1405978279538-5812285.post@n5.nabble.com>
 <CACuOPqBc7kKiv4JjqQwEJO1PG7iN5XByt9-b9Di2i69k+SV5dA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Slow query with indexed ORDER BY and LIMIT when using OR'd
 conditions
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-performance-owner@postgresql.org

johno wrote
> Thanks for the quick reply David!
> 
> However I am still unsure how these two queries are not relationally
> equivalent. I am struggling to find a counterexample where the first and
> third query (in email, not in gist) would yield different results. Any
> ideas?

Remove the outer LIMIT 100 from both queries...

The first query would return a maximal number of rows that meet the OR
criteria while the second query would return at most 200 rows since both
sub-queries would still have their own independent LIMIT 100 clauses.

David J.


--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Slow-query-with-indexed-ORDER-BY-and-LIMIT-when-using-OR-d-conditions-tp5812282p5812289.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - performance mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance