Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On the other side of the coin, there's the analogy to GROUP BY that Greg
> points out --- there's some duplicated functionality there, but again it
> doesn't carry over to DISTINCT ON, AFAICS.
The equivalent query for:
SELECT DISTINCT ON (x,y) a,b,c FROM .
Hi Beth,
"Beth Jen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Right now, the distinct clause adds its targets to the sort clause list when
> it is parsed.
Yeah, the DISTINCT/DISTINCT ON implementation is currently rather
tightly tied to sorting :-(. This is ancient code and badly in need of
redesign, but it
Martijn van Oosterhout writes:
> On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Beth Jen wrote:
> > Right now, the distinct clause adds its targets to the sort clause list when
> > it is parsed. This causes an automatic insertion of the sort node into the
> > query plan before the application of the u
On Fri, Jul 07, 2006 at 01:25:53PM -0400, Beth Jen wrote:
> Right now, the distinct clause adds its targets to the sort clause list when
> it is parsed. This causes an automatic insertion of the sort node into the
> query plan before the application of the unique node. The hash-based
> implementati
Hello,
My name is Beth Jen and I'm a Summer of Code student currently adding a
hash-based implementation of DISTINCT to PostgreSQL. My prototype is
near completion, and the current design is as follows:
I've
created a new exec node that uses hash table functions in execGrouping.
The node simp
