On Sat, 23 Feb 2002, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 01:53:40PM -0500, Francisco Reyes wrote:
> > Is Oracle better at aggregate functions?
> > Another point worth mentioning. The Oracle table has 40K records less.
> > Postgresql has 770K, Oracld has 730K.
>
> Posssibly. At the moment postgres will grab all the data from the table,
> sort it, group it and then aggregate. Oracle is probably cleverer and just
> aggregates directly. On that many rows it probably makes a difference.
How could it be done in a more clever fashion?
Or how would something be aggregated "directly"?