From: | Willow Chargin <postgresql(at)wchargin(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | shammat(at)gmx(dot)net |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Functionally dependent columns in SELECT DISTINCT |
Date: | 2024-09-13 15:26:53 |
Message-ID: | CAALRJs5QkE-yWVdxQxOLXbM8DyPVV3M_=zfsPK17SV-zHQsASQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 11:13 PM <shammat(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>
> What about using DISTINCT ON () ?
> SELECT DISTINCT ON (items.id) items.*
> FROM items
> JOIN parts ON items.id = parts.item_id
> WHERE part_id % 3 = 0
> ORDER BY items.id,items.create_time DESC
> LIMIT 5;
>
> This gives me this plan: https://explain.depesz.com/s/QHr6 on 16.2 (Windows, i7-1260P)
Ordering by items.id changes the answer, though. In the example I gave,
items.id and items.create_time happened to be in the same order, but
that needn't hold. In reality I really do want the ID columns of the
*most recent* items.
You can see the difference if you build the test dataset a bit
differently:
INSERT INTO items(id, create_time)
SELECT i, now() - make_interval(secs => random() * 1e6)
FROM generate_series(1, 1000000) s(i);
We want the returned create_times to be all recent, and the IDs now
should look roughly random.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Wong, Kam Fook (TR Technology) | 2024-09-13 15:34:55 | Will hundred of thousands of this type of query cause Parsing issue |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2024-09-13 14:57:28 | Re: Manual query vs trigger during data load |