From: | Tomasz Myrta <jasiek(at)klaster(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: order by and aggregate |
Date: | 2003-01-06 16:59:54 |
Message-ID: | 3E19B60A.9080701@klaster.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomasz Myrta writes:
>
> >Standard Postgresql aggregate functions don't need sorted data, but my
> >function needs. Look at the data:
> >
> >3 3
> >-2 1
> >6 7 *** max_sum=7
> >-3 4
> >2 6
>
>
> But if the input data is sorted into increasing order, then the largest
> running sum value is always at the end. Therefore max(sum()) is
> equivalent to sum(); therefore you do not need the special aggregate,
> nor the ordering.
>
> regards, tom lane
Sorting data by "value" was only an example,
In my case data is sorted by another key and has mixed positive and
negative values.
Tomasz Myrta
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomasz Myrta | 2003-01-06 17:07:57 | Re: order by and aggregate |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-01-06 16:36:58 | Re: order by and aggregate |