Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08804763B0 for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 05:01:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from fzkmail2.fzk.de (fzkmail2.fzk.de [141.52.27.52]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C100447639D for ; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 05:01:15 -0500 (EST) Received: FROM resy5.fzk.de BY fzkmail2.fzk.de ; Fri Nov 08 11:01:14 2002 +0100 Received: œby rodos.fzk.de with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.1) id LAA07393; Fri, 8 Nov 2002 11:01:14 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <3DCB8B69.78B247BB@rodos.fzk.de> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2002 11:01:13 +0100 From: Christoph Haller X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (X11; I; HP-UX B.10.20 9000/780) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: terry@ashtonwoodshomes.com Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org Subject: Re: query optimization question Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200211/134 X-Sequence-Number: 10276 > > This is the final query, can anyone see anything wrong with it?: > SELECT projects.project_id, projects.marketing_name, > COUNT(lots.lot_id) AS def_count, > COUNT(CASE WHEN dt.days_old_start_date < {d '2002-10-08'} > THEN lots.lot_id ELSE NULL END > ) AS def_count_less_30, > COUNT(CASE WHEN dt.days_old_start_date >= {d '2002-10-08'} > AND dt.days_old_start_date < {d '2002-09-08'} > THEN lots.lot_id ELSE NULL END > ) AS def_count_30_60, > COUNT(CASE WHEN dt.days_old_start_date >= {d '2002-09-08'} > THEN lots.lot_id ELSE NULL END > ) AS def_count_greater_60, > COUNT(DISTINCT(CASE WHEN dt.days_old_start_date < {d '2002-10-08'} > AND dt.deficiency_status_id = ds.deficiency_status_id > THEN lots.lot_id ELSE NULL END) > ) AS lot_count_less_30, > COUNT(DISTINCT(CASE WHEN dt.days_old_start_date >= {d '2002-10-08'} > AND dt.days_old_start_date < {d '2002-09-08'} > THEN lots.lot_id ELSE NULL END) > ) AS lot_count_30_60, > COUNT(DISTINCT(CASE WHEN dt.days_old_start_date >= {d '2002-09-08'} > THEN lots.lot_id ELSE NULL END) > ) AS lot_count_greater_60, > COUNT(DISTINCT lots.lot_id) AS lot_count > FROM > (SELECT * FROM deficiency_table) AS dt, > (SELECT * FROM deficiency_status WHERE is_outstanding) AS ds, > (SELECT * FROM projects WHERE division_id = 'GGH') AS proj, > (SELECT * FROM lots) AS lots > WHERE proj.division_id = 'GGH' > AND lots.division_id = proj.division_id > AND lots.project_id = proj.project_id > AND dt.lot_id = lots.lot_id > AND dt.deficiency_status_id = ds.deficiency_status_id > AND ds.is_outstanding > AND lots.project_id = 'EM16' > AND NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM menu_group_projects WHERE menu_code = 'WA' > AND division_id = proj.division_id AND project_id = proj.project_id AND > status = 'I') > GROUP BY projects.project_id, projects.marketing_name > First thing I would try change > SELECT projects.project_id, projects.marketing_name, to SELECT proj.project_id, proj.marketing_name, and > GROUP BY projects.project_id, projects.marketing_name to GROUP BY proj.project_id, proj.marketing_name because I think the sub-SELECT (SELECT * FROM projects WHERE division_id = 'GGH') AS proj should be referenced instead of the table projects. If you still receive the startling result, I'd like to suggest another approach. Why not generate a view or sub-SELECT first which shows all the columns you need to refer to resp. count, and then SELECT project_id, marketing_name, COUNT( ... , ... , FROM < the view or sub-SELECT> -- no WHERE-clauses at all GROUP BY project_id, marketing_name ; It should at least make it more easy to track down what's wrong. Regards, Christoph