On 14/11/14 00:46, Simon Riggs wrote:
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
Going off on a tangent, when I was playing with a merge-sort
Jeremy Harris j...@wizmail.org writes:
On 14/11/14 00:46, Simon Riggs wrote:
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
Going off on a tangent, when I was
On 14/11/14 14:54, Tom Lane wrote:
Jeremy Harris j...@wizmail.org writes:
On 14/11/14 00:46, Simon Riggs wrote:
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
The Sort estimate shows 568733 rows, whereas the actual rows are 20.
Both are correct, in a way.
The node
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
The Sort estimate shows 568733 rows, whereas the actual rows
Tom Lane-2 wrote
Simon Riggs lt;
simon@
gt; writes:
Limit (cost= rows=20 width=175) (actual time= rows=20 loops=1)
- Sort (cost= rows=568733 width=175) (actual time=
rows=20 loops=1)
Sort Method: top-N heapsort
The Sort estimate shows 568733 rows, whereas
David G Johnston david.g.johns...@gmail.com writes:
Tom Lane-2 wrote
[ shrug... ] The estimated value is the planner's estimate of what would
happen *if you ran the node to completion*, which in practice doesn't
happen because of the LIMIT.
I don't see how a sort node cannot run to
