> II) SQL
> ---
>
> The first idea is to ask SQL to do the job with a 'group by' clause:
>
> SELECT area, type, month, SUM(amount), COUNT(*)
> FROM client AS c, invoice AS i
> WHERE c.id=i.client
> GROUP BY area, type, month;
>
> As I am just interested in reading the data, without any transact
> You want to process all invoices to count them
> and to sum up the amounts on a per month/area/type
> basis. The initial data size is in GB, but the
> size of the expected result is in KB (namely 2 data
> for each 100 areas * 12 months * 4 types).
The key to handling large datasets for data min
On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 18:39:33 +0200,
Fabien COELHO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> As the resulting table is very small, I wish the optimizer would have
> skipped the sort phase, so as to aggregate the data as they come after the
> join. All may be done on the fly without much additionnal stor
Dear PostgreSQL developers,
I have considered postgresql for data-mining, and I would like to
share some comments on the issues involved, that result in several
specific suggestions for improvements in various areas. I've notice
that some of the issues seems listed in the todo list, so it may be
