I apologize for the multiple posts. I sent this email right after joining the list and after it hadn't shown up a day later I figured that it had been lost or something and sent the other one.
Also, the database I posted this about does not have internet access and so I'm working on getting it moved over to a machine that does or getting it the info onto a machine where I can post the pertinent information about the schema and explain outputs. Thanks, Dave -- Dave Johansen phone: (520) 302-4526 On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Robert Klemme <shortcut...@googlemail.com>wrote: > Dave, > > how often do you want to repeat that posting? What about instead > replying to the answers you got so far? > > Cheers > > robert > > > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Dave Johansen <davejohan...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I am using Postgres 8.3 and I have an issue very closely related to the > one > > described here: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2005-06/msg00488.php > > > > Basically, I have a VIEW which is a UNION ALL of two tables but when I do > a > > select on the view using a LIMIT, it scans the entire tables and takes > > significantly longer than writing out the query with the LIMITs in the > > sub-queries themselves. Is there a solution to get the view to perform > like > > the sub-query version? > > > > Thanks, > > Dave > > > > -- > remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end > http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/ >
