From: | Віталій Тимчишин <tivv00(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Uwe Bartels <uwe(dot)bartels(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 14:22:23 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTimV3yEF_Dq6rA+m0tfYkFAwwwYNPA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
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 | Josh Berkus | 2011-04-25 18:06:47 | Re: Issue with partition elimination |
Previous Message | Uwe Bartels | 2011-04-24 19:01:36 | Re: big distinct clause vs. group by |