Hello 2012/1/23 Douglas Eric <sekkuar@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > I'm not sure if this is the right list to discuss this, but, I have a > suggestion: > > ORDER BY clause, as defined in the SELECT documentation says: > > "If ORDER BY is not given, the rows are returned in whatever order the > system finds fastest to produce" > > This order is usually not wanted, as it is not predictable. I believe many > people would expect the order of rows > returned in this case, to be ordered as the primary key of the table, or the > same order the rows were inserted. > > I suggest to change this behavior. If one makes a SELECT statement without > any ORDER BY, it would be > clever to automatically sort by the first primary key found in the query, if > any. > The present behavior would still be used in case of queries without any > primary key fields. > > This would save a lot of repeated clauses "ORDER BY <table primary key>" > that we have to add to every SELECT, even the most simple one > "SELECT * FROM <table>" > If we actually want the order of the rows to make any sense. * I don't think so this is good idea. Any sort is not cheap - so ORDER BY "hint" - yes, user can do expensive operation. * second argument SELECT * FROM longtab LIMIT 100 is significantly faster than SELECT * FROM longtab ORDER BY PK LIMIT 100; so implicit ORDER BY can significantly increase a load of server Regards Pavel Stehule -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
