From: | Thomas F(dot)O'Connell <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
Cc: | PgSQL - SQL <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Counting Distinct Records |
Date: | 2004-11-17 19:27:17 |
Message-ID: | B16EB296-38CE-11D9-95C2-000D93AE0944@sitening.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
The specific problem I'm trying to solve involves a user table with
some history.
Something like this:
create table user_history (
user_id int
event_time_stamp timestamp
);
I'd like to be able to count the distinct user_ids in this table, even
if it were joined to other tables.
-tfo
--
Thomas F. O'Connell
Co-Founder, Information Architect
Sitening, LLC
http://www.sitening.com/
110 30th Avenue North, Suite 6
Nashville, TN 37203-6320
615-260-0005
On Nov 17, 2004, at 8:52 AM, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Thomas F.O'Connell wrote:
>
>> Hmm. I was more interested in using COUNT( * ) than DISTINCT *.
>>
>> I want a count of all rows, but I want to be able to specify which
>> columns are distinct.
>
> I'm now a bit confused about exactly what you're looking for in the
> end.
> Can you give a short example?
>
>> That's definitely an interesting approach, but testing doesn't show it
>> to be appreciably faster.
>>
>> If I do a DISTINCT *, postgres will attempt to guarantee that there
>> are
>> no duplicate values across all columns rather than a subset of
>> columns?
>> Is that right?
>
> It guarantees one output row for each distinct set of column values
> across
> all columns.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Harry Smith | 2004-11-18 03:01:46 | Usenet Discussion Proposal |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-11-17 15:24:23 | Re: session_id |