[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2798?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17101093#comment-17101093
]
Stamatis Zampetakis commented on CALCITE-2798:
----------------------------------------------
First apologies for commenting on a closed issue but I have the impression that
maybe we should rethink the decision of removing the ORDER BY from sub-queries.
If I am not interpreting wrong the SQL standard ORDER BY in sub-queries is an
optional feature (i.e., F851) and databases like Postgres and Oracle do support
it.
> Optimizer should remove ORDER BY in sub-query, provided it has no LIMIT or
> OFFSET
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-2798
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2798
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.18.0
> Reporter: Vladimir Sitnikov
> Assignee: Julian Hyde
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 1.19.0
>
>
> The following SQL performs sort twice, however inner sort can be eliminated
> {code}select * from (
> select * from "emps"
> order by "emps"."deptno"
> ) order by 1 desc{code}
> The same goes for (window calculation will sort on its own)
> {code}select row_number() over (order by "emps"."deptno") from (
> select * from "emps"
> order by "emps"."deptno" desc
> ){code}
> The same goes for SetOp (union, minus):
> {code}select * from (
> select * from "emps"
> order by "emps"."deptno"
> ) union select * from (
> select * from "emps"
> order by "emps"."deptno" desc
> ){code}
> There might be other cases like that (e.g. Aggregate, Join, Exchange,
> SortExchange)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
