Reply-To: <nickf@ontko.com>
From: "Nick Fankhauser" <nickf@ontko.com>
To: "Eric Soroos" <eric-psql@soroos.net>
Cc: "PGSQL-SQL" <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Is there a more elegant way to write this query?...
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:23:02 -0500
Message-ID: <NEBBLAAHGLEEPCGOBHDGCEFPJGAA.nickf@ontko.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <0F5B254A-13C6-11D8-ABDC-0003930F2A6C@soroos.net>

Hi Eric-

Thanks for your suggestion.

> An explain analyze would help.

I'll do that (and move the question to the performance list) when I get to
the performance question, but at this point, I'm just seeking some help in
looking at this from a different angle- I couldn't figure out how to achieve
the result I was after without using max(), which felt like a kludge. Your
solution gave me the start I needed.

-Nick


> How about:
> select
> 	actor.actor_full_name,
> 	actor.actor_id,
> 	s1.ctCases,
> 	s1.case_id,
> 	case_data.case_public_id
> from
> 	actor inner join ( select actor_id, count(*) as ctCases,
> max(case_id)
> as case_id
> 						from
> actor_case_assignment group by actor_id) as s1
> 				on (actor.actor_id = s1.actor_id)
> 		 left outer join case_data using
> (s1.case_id=case_data.case_id)
> limit 1000;