Hi Michael, We have also tried the /*+ FIRST_ROWS(N) */ optimization hint, it only gave a 25% speed improvement, but the result was still 5 or 7 times slower than the ROW_NUMBER() OVER approach. I'll provide benchmark details on Monday, also details about table (actually a view) layout, indices, etc.
On Jun 23, 6:04 pm, Michael Bayer <mike...@zzzcomputing.com> wrote: > > A full history of this feature is here: > > http://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/ticket/536 > > The rationale is based on the bug described in that ticket, as well as that > we preferred to go with an approach that was recommended by a lead engineer > at Oracle. > > The dialect includes an option to add the /*+ FIRST_ROWS(N) */ directive, by > specifying the "optimize_limits" keyword to create engine - we originally had > that in the query in all cases, until some folks chimed in that we shouldn't > make that decision by default. I don't know if that helps your use case. > > The previous system can be restored using a @compiles directive. I have > documented that recipe > athttp://www.sqlalchemy.org/trac/wiki/UsageRecipes/OracleRowNumberOver. I don't understand yet how the @compiles directive works, but I'm also not that familiar with SA internals. Could you point me to some URL where this is described? Thanks, Ralph -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalch...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sqlalchemy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.
