On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 00:32 +0100, vsriram30 wrote: > But as you say probably the internal skips using the cursor might be more > efficient than the skip done with increasing the start, I will use the > cursors. Kindly correct me if my understanding is not right.
Let's say you want page 5.000 and that page size is 1.000. Non-cursor skipping is the same as making a request for top 5.000.000, then extracting the last 1.000 entries from that. It just happens under the hood. Cursor-based skipping is performance-wise the same as making a request for the first top 1000. There is practically no difference in speed between page 1 and page 5.000. I say practically because on paper, requesting page 5.000 will be a smidgen faster (there are less inserts into the priority queue), but I doubt it can be measured in real world setups. - Toke Eskildsen
