On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:31:22 -0500,
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I just a couple days ago added some logic to CVS tip to notice that the
> sub-select has a DISTINCT clause, and not add unnecessary unique-ifying
> processing on top of it. So in 7.5, writing a DISTINCT clause will
PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: 2004. január 6. 21:04
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Query performance question on a large table
>
>
> =?iso-8859-2?Q?Egy=FCd_Csaba?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > here is
Sean Shanny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sort of piggybacking on this thread but why the suggestion to drop the
> use of DISTINCT in 7.4?
Because the 7.4 planner can decide for itself whether DISTINCT'ifying
the sub-select output is the best way to proceed or not. There is more
than one good wa
Tom,
Sort of piggybacking on this thread but why the suggestion to drop the
use of DISTINCT in 7.4? We use DISTINCT all over the place to eliminate
duplicates in sub select statements. Running 7.4.0 currently on
FreeBSD5.1 Dell 2650 4GB RAM 5 disk SCSI array hardware RAID 0
Example:
explain
