From: | Uwe Bartels <uwe(dot)bartels(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Віталій Тимчишин <tivv00(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: big distinct clause vs. group by |
Date: | 2011-04-25 19:01:09 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTikNf0fnrrZfUY6SdUQuGKSpdR5AcQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi Vitalii,
this sounds promising, can you send me that?
Best Regards,
Uwe
2011/4/25 Віталій Тимчишин <tivv00(at)gmail(dot)com>
>
>
> 2011/4/23 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
>
>> On Apr 18, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Uwe Bartels <uwe(dot)bartels(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> > Hi Robert,
>> >
>> > thanks for your answer.
>> > the aggregate function I was talking about is the function I need to use
>> for the non-group by columns like min() in my example.
>> > There are of course several function to choose from, and I wanted to
>> know which causes as less as possible resources.
>>
>> Oh, I see. min() is probably as good as anything. You could also create a
>> custom aggregate that just always returns its first input. I've occasionally
>> wished we had such a thing as a built-in.
>>
>>
> I've once done "single" grouping function - it checks that all it's input
> values are equal (non-null ones) and returns the value or raises an error if
> there are two different values.
>
> Best regards, Vitalii Tymchyshyn
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Vitalii Tymchyshyn
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | J Sisson | 2011-04-25 19:30:59 | Time to put theory to the test? |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2011-04-25 18:06:47 | Re: Issue with partition elimination |