Hi, i would like to push an old question again to the users. In original it has written to the old forum bei "peter77" on 10-17-2008. But now I have the same problem.
Here the question: "The Skip(n) method is not optimally transformed into SQL. Consider the following LINQ expression: (from e in _context.EMPLOYEE orderby e.NAME select e.NAME).Skip(9999).Take(99); This generates the following SQL: SELECT [Var_8_1].[NAME] AS [NAME] WHERE NOT (EXISTS (SELECT [Var_8_3].[NAME] AS [NAME] FROM ( SELECT [Extent1].[NAME] AS [NAME] FROM [EMPLOYEE] AS [Extent1] ORDER BY [Extent1].[NAME] ASC LIMIT 9999 ) AS [Var_8_3] WHERE ([Var_8_1].[NAME] = [Var_8_3].[NAME]) OR (([Var_8_1].[NAME] IS NULL) AND ([Var_8_3].[NAME] IS NULL)))) ORDER BY [Var_8_1].[NAME] ASC LIMIT 99 This is very slow if the employee table has a large number of recods, even if the NAME column is indexed. A much more optimal (and shorter) SQL would be: SELECT name FROM employee ORDER BY name ASC LIMIT 99 OFFSET 9999 Of course this only works if the LINQ expression has a Take(m) clause specified besides Skin(n). If Take(m) is not specified you could work around by inserting a fake "LIMIT" clause, eg.: SELECT name FROM employee ORDER BY name ASC LIMIT (SELECT count(*) FROM employee) OFFSET 9999 or just a huge number in the LIMIT clause: SELECT name FROM employee ORDER BY name ASC LIMIT 1000000000000000 OFFSET 9999" Regards Steffen _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
