From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Madison Kelly <linux(at)alteeve(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: subquery/alias question |
Date: | 2007-09-26 02:44:40 |
Message-ID: | 11977.1190774680@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> writes:
> I believe you'd have to write it like
> select dom_id, dom_name, count(usr_dom_id) as usr_count
> from domains
> join users on (usr_dom_id = dom_id)
> having count(usr_dom_id) > 0
> order by dom_name;
> I don't know how the performance would compare. I think the backend
> is smart enough to know it doesn't need to perform two seq scans to
> calculate count(usr_dom_id), but I wasn't sure.
It has been smart enough for a few years now --- don't recall when
exactly, but nodeAgg.c quoth
* Perform lookups of aggregate function info, and initialize the
* unchanging fields of the per-agg data. We also detect duplicate
* aggregates (for example, "SELECT sum(x) ... HAVING sum(x) > 0"). When
* duplicates are detected, we only make an AggStatePerAgg struct for the
* first one. The clones are simply pointed at the same result entry by
* giving them duplicate aggno values.
... which in English means we just do the calculation once ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mike C | 2007-09-26 02:52:35 | NZDT Question |
Previous Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2007-09-26 02:26:55 | Re: subquery/alias question |