From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg, mysql comparison with "group by" clause
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:11:43 -0400
Message-ID: <20051013141143.GA16317@phlogiston.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87oe5uyrfs.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
References: <3C6C2B281FD3E74C9F7C9D5B1EDA4582182614@wgexch01.wgenhq.net>
<87oe5uyrfs.fsf@stark.xeocode.com>
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 12:24:55AM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> Well the "constants and the like" are precisely the point. There
> are plenty of cases where adding the column to the GROUP BY is
> unnecessary and since Postgres makes no attempt to prune them out,
> inefficient.
But inefficient pruning is an optimiser problem, not something that
should lead one to invent a whole syntax change that (a) violates the
standard and (b) is at least somewhat opaque in meaning. The right
thing to do is surely to make the optimiser smarter, no? (Think,
"What does DB2 have that we don't?")
A
--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
This work was visionary and imaginative, and goes to show that visionary
and imaginative work need not end up well.
--Dennis Ritchie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: ajs@crankycanuck.ca
Subject: Re: pg, mysql comparison with "group by" clause
In-Reply-To: <20051013141143.GA16317@phlogiston.dyndns.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox