From: | "Matthias Urlichs" <smurf(at)noris(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff MacDonald <jeff(at)pgsql(dot)com> |
Cc: | omid omoomi <oomoomi(at)hotmail(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Re: 7.0 weirdness |
Date: | 2000-05-30 14:31:35 |
Message-ID: | 20000530163135.P25517@noris.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-sql |
Hi,
Jeff MacDonald:
> gid is unique.. it's a serial..
>
Then there is no point in using "DISTINCT" in the first place, is there?
> funny thing is tho this worked on 6.5
It happened to work because your gid is unique. But in the general case,
it can't work. Consider this table:
gid created
X 1
Y 2
X 3
Now, should your query's result be
gid
X
Y
or should it be
gid
Y
X
? And since the typical implementation throws away non-selected-for
columns before UNIQUEing, how should it be able to sort anything?
--
Matthias Urlichs | noris network GmbH | smurf(at)noris(dot)de | ICQ: 20193661
The quote was selected randomly. Really. | http://smurf.noris.de/
--
Problem mit cookie: File exists
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-05-30 14:42:43 | Re: Applying TOAST to CURRENT |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-05-30 14:22:39 | Re: Configuration and build clean-up |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2000-05-30 14:44:59 | Re: 7.0 weirdness |
Previous Message | Jeff MacDonald | 2000-05-30 14:10:24 | Re: 7.0 weirdness |