From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> |
Cc: | Albe Laurenz <all(at)adv(dot)magwien(dot)gv(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: group by points |
Date: | 2006-05-22 22:38:35 |
Message-ID: | 15608.1148337515@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to> writes:
> On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:23:28 +0200,
> Albe Laurenz <all(at)adv(dot)magwien(dot)gv(dot)at> wrote:
>> In order to (efficiently) process a GROUP BY clause, you need a
>> total ordering on the data type that you group by, i.e. an ordering
>> such that for any two data x and y you have either x < y or x > x
>> or x = y.
> An equality operator is good enough if the number of unique groups isn't too
> large, so that a hash aggregate plan works efficiently.
Doesn't help for the case at hand, since point_eq isn't marked hashable
either. It would be good to fix things so that the system doesn't
insist on having the sorting option available, though.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-22 23:12:02 | Re: Porting MSSQL to PGSQL (Was: [OT] MySQL is bad, but THIS bad?) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-22 22:34:19 | Re: pgbench create index anomoly |