Re: Clustered tables and seqscan disabled
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Clustered tables and seqscan disabled |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 21005.1134233630@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Clustered tables and seqscan disabled (Henrique Engelmann <henriqueengelmann@yahoo.com.br>) |
Список | pgsql-performance |
Henrique Engelmann <henriqueengelmann@yahoo.com.br> writes: > I suggested changing the application and including a order by clause... but > the software house didn�t make it because they said the system was originally designed for oracle and they did not needto use the ORDER BY clause with Oracle and even so the data were always retrieved in primary index order. > I�m thinking with myself ... what kind of problems will they have in the future? If you aren't working with these people any more, be glad. They are obviously utterly incompetent. The SQL standard is perfectly clear about the matter: without ORDER BY, there is no guarantee about the order in which rows are retrieved. The fact that one specific implementation might have chanced to produce the rows in desired order (under all the conditions they had bothered to test, which I bet wasn't a lot) does not make their code correct. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: