Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1aSzwo-0008GC-Gk for pgsql-sql@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 04:30:42 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSzwn-0006Py-Ib for pgsql-sql@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 04:30:41 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSzvp-0005I9-Gm for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 04:29:41 +0000 Received: from mailuogwhop.emc.com ([168.159.213.141]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aSzvk-0004tv-Ua for pgsql-sql@postgresql.org; Tue, 09 Feb 2016 04:29:39 +0000 Received: from maildlpprd01.lss.emc.com (maildlpprd01.lss.emc.com [10.253.24.33]) by mailuogwprd04.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id u194TXr9010753 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 23:29:33 -0500 X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd04.lss.emc.com u194TXr9010753 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=emc.com; s=jan2013; t=1454992173; bh=2nriHDo2A9QVlOwLwDqh8bBdpfM=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=DERlPzEw/3wTfyyPY5k6GN93KPb1eWNgpOuPZKs/lmitflRLwzI6qeoV9dZNRDE1s gl6ruwusRcHlqWNEwIU2f1rzBMUA3FX7X/+1JwpH+co6obdGAmDLRjE/F/RzY5fwF/ TNLYoTO8YA7O+AqfH8R5PeWQt6nldUrMK7FtnINo= X-DKIM: OpenDKIM Filter v2.4.3 mailuogwprd04.lss.emc.com u194TXr9010753 Received: from mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com (mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com [10.106.48.24]) by maildlpprd01.lss.emc.com (RSA Interceptor) for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 23:28:55 -0500 Received: from MXHUB105.corp.emc.com (MXHUB105.corp.emc.com [10.253.50.22]) by mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.0) with ESMTP id u194TGIR014894 (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 23:29:16 -0500 Received: from MX105CL01.corp.emc.com ([fe80::e020:347b:74e3:4176]) by MXHUB105.corp.emc.com ([10.253.50.22]) with mapi id 14.03.0266.001; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 23:29:16 -0500 From: "Venkatesan, Sekhar" To: "pgsql-sql@postgresql.org" Subject: Question on PostgreSQL DB behavior w.r.t JOIN and sort order. Thread-Topic: Question on PostgreSQL DB behavior w.r.t JOIN and sort order. Thread-Index: AdFi8MH6WiSn/w2ETze/qHqqolOx7g== Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 04:29:15 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.30.85.98] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F84DE43FDACD4C45AA84E2DA016FAE2F1C65BE54MX105CL01corpem_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Sentrion-Hostname: mailusrhubprd51.lss.emc.com X-RSA-Classifications: public X-Pg-Spam-Score: -4.6 (----) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-sql Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org --_000_F84DE43FDACD4C45AA84E2DA016FAE2F1C65BE54MX105CL01corpem_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi folks, I am seeing this behavior change in postgreSQL DB when compared to SQL Serv= er DB when JOIN is performed. The sort order is not retained when JOIN is p= erformed in PostgreSQL DB. Is it expected? Is there a solution available to retain the sort order duri= ng JOIN? We have applications that expects the same sort order during JOIN = and we want to support our application on PostgreSQL DB. DO we need to indicate to the PostgreSQL DB optimizer to not change the sor= t order? If so, how to do it and what are it's implications.