From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Some question about lazy subquery/procedures execution in SELECT ... ORDER BY... LIMIT N queries
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:05:02 -0500
Message-ID: <24774.1322154302@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK-MWwTasteHbxcSN69jKfBbXJmxxUrtH7xL-jaBjEj3_2xfaQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK-MWwTasteHbxcSN69jKfBbXJmxxUrtH7xL-jaBjEj3_2xfaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Maxim Boguk <maxim.boguk@gmail.com> writes:
> Is here any reason why Postgresql calculates subqueries/storable procedures
> in select list before applying ORDER BY / LIMIT?
Well, that's the definition of ORDER BY --- it happens after computing
the select list, according to the SQL standard. We try to optimize this
in some cases but you can't really complain when we don't. Consider
putting the expensive function outside the ORDER BY/LIMIT, ie
select ..., expensive_fn() from (select ... order by ... limit ...) ss;
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, maxim.boguk@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Some question about lazy subquery/procedures execution in SELECT ... ORDER BY... LIMIT N queries
In-Reply-To: <24774.1322154302@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox