Alex Drobychev wrote: > I agree with this maybe 98% - but not 100%. :-) Unfortunately > performance can change rather unpredictably when the DB stops > fitting in memory - say, 3-4 months after a production roll-out, too > late for profiling experiments. :-( Surely you're capable of inventing random data to simulate the load you'll have in 3-4 months or even a year? David is correct in that the order is not guaranteed. It's not just a matter of which order the rows were inserted -- the executor can do a lot of things internally that would make the result appear in a different order. Even when the data is CLUSTER'ed the ordering can be lost. If you want to have a guaranteed order, use ORDER BY. -- Alvaro Herrera Developer, http://www.PostgreSQL.org/ "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end." (2nd Commandment for C programmers) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
