Hi,
here is what the original query was which was obviously nonsense :
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT DISTINCT letoltes.cid, s.elofordulas FROM letoltes
INNER JOIN (select letoltes.cid, count(letoltes.cid) AS elofordulas FROM
letoltes GROUP BY cid) s ON s.cid=letoltes.cid ORDER BY s.elofordulas DESC
LIMIT
Faludi Gábor wrote:
> . Why does the second and the later queries take the whole on second
> if the dataset is the same . Shouldn't PG realise that the query is the same
> so i give the user the same resultset ?
That would require a result cache. I don't know if Pg even has a query
result
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Faludi Gábor wrote:
EXPLAIN ANALYZE SELECT DISTINCT letoltes.cid, count(letoltes.cid) AS
elofordulas FROM letoltes GROUP BY cid ORDER BY elofordulas DESC LIMIT 5;
QUERY PLAN
---
Craig Ringer wrote:
> Faludi Gábor wrote:
>
> > . Why does the second and the later queries take the whole on second
> > if the dataset is the same . Shouldn't PG realise that the query is the same
> > so i give the user the same resultset ?
>
> That would require a result cache. I don't
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 10:24 PM, Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008, Francisco Reyes wrote:
>
>> On 2:59 pm 06/29/08 Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Right now I'm working with a few other people to put together a more
>>> straightforward single intro guide th
