| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimi Paun <dimi(at)lattica(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: DISTINCT vs. GROUP BY |
| Date: | 2010-02-09 22:38:21 |
| Message-ID: | 25105.1265755101@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Dimi Paun <dimi(at)lattica(dot)com> writes:
>> From what I've read on the net, these should be very similar,
> and should generate equivalent plans, in such cases:
> SELECT DISTINCT x FROM mytable
> SELECT x FROM mytable GROUP BY x
> However, in my case (postgresql-server-8.1.18-2.el5_4.1),
> they generated different results with quite different
> execution times (73ms vs 40ms for DISTINCT and GROUP BY
> respectively):
The results certainly ought to be the same (although perhaps not with
the same ordering) --- if they aren't, please provide a reproducible
test case.
As for efficiency, though, 8.1 didn't understand how to use hash
aggregation for DISTINCT. Less-obsolete versions do know how to do
that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimi Paun | 2010-02-10 01:43:47 | Re: DISTINCT vs. GROUP BY |
| Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2010-02-09 22:22:17 | Re: DISTINCT vs. GROUP BY |