essage-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Rich
>> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 8:52 PM
>> To: 'Joshua D. Drake'; 'Tom Lane'
>> Cc: 'Craig A. James'; 'PostgreSQL Performance'
>>
Luke Lonergan wrote:
> Adam,
>
> This optimization would require teaching the planner to use an index for
> MAX/MIN when available. It seems like an OK thing to do to me.
This optimization already exists, albeit for queries that use a single
table.
--
Alvaro Herrera
Adam Rich wrote:
>
> Did anybody get a chance to look at this? Is it expected behavior?
> Everyone seemed so incredulous, I hoped maybe this exposed a bug
> that would be fixed in a near release.
Actually, the planner is only able to do the min()/max() transformation
into order by/limit in the c
4, 2007 8:52 PM
> To: 'Joshua D. Drake'; 'Tom Lane'
> Cc: 'Craig A. James'; 'PostgreSQL Performance'
> Subject: Re: [PERFORM] max() versus order/limit (WAS: High
> update activity, PostgreSQL vs BigDBMS)
>
>
> Did anybody get a chance to
Did anybody get a chance to look at this? Is it expected behavior?
Everyone seemed so incredulous, I hoped maybe this exposed a bug
that would be fixed in a near release.
-Original Message-
From: Adam Rich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 11:53 PM
To: 'Joshua D.
