On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > silly8888 escribió: >> 2009/10/26 Grzegorz Jaśkiewicz <gryzman@xxxxxxxxx>: >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:30 AM, silly8888 <silly8888@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> Suppose that you have a query, say $sql_query, which is very >> >> complicated and produces many rows. Which of the following is going to >> >> be faser: >> >> >> >> $sql_query OFFSET 3000 LIMIT 12; >> >> >> >> or >> >> >> >> BEGIN; >> >> DECLARE cur1 CURSOR FOR $sql_query; >> >> MOVE 3000 IN cur1; >> >> FETCH 12 FROM cur1; >> >> COMMIT; >> >> >> >> Naturally, the former cannot be slower than the latter. So my question >> >> essentially is whether the MOVE operation on a cursor is >> >> (significantly) slower that a OFFSET on the SELECT. >> > >> > >> > OFFSET/LIMIT. Afaik cursor always fetches everything. >> >> Well, in my experiments they always perform the same. I suspect that >> the way SELECT/OFFSET is implemented is not much different than >> cursor/MOVE. > > The cursor could choose a different plan due to the "fast startup" > behavior that Pavel alludes to. You can actually change that by setting > the cursor_tuple_fraction parameter. Whether this plan is faster or > slower than the other one is problem dependent. > > -- > Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ > The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. > OK, so based on what Alvaro & Pavel said, the following two possibilities are equivalent as far as the query planner is concerned: $sql_query OFFSET 3000 LIMIT 12; or BEGIN; SET LOCAL cursor_tuple_fraction=1; DECLARE cur1 CURSOR FOR $sql_query; MOVE 3000 IN cur1; FETCH 12 FROM cur1; COMMIT; The problem is that in the latter case, the query planner doesn't know in advance that we are going to skip the first 3000 rows. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
