Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: histogram

From: "David Johnston" <polobo(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: "'Rob Sargent'" <robjsargent(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Joel Reymont'" <joelr1(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: histogram
Date: 2011-04-30 21:41:52
Message-ID: 02a801cc077f$6bca68d0$435f3a70$ (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-general
Given that you are actively implementing the code that uses the 1 and 2 I
don't see how it is that egregious.  When generating calculated fields it is
cleaner than the alternative:

Select trunc(distance * 10.)/10., count(*)
>From doc_ads
Group by (trunc(distance * 10.))
Order by (trunc(distance * 10.))

It would be nice if you could do:

Select trunc(distance * 10.)/10. AS bin, count(*) AS frequency
>From doc_ads
Group by bin
Order by bin

But I do not believe that is allowed (though I may have my syntax wrong...)

David J.

>> re: 1 and 2. They're horrible (imho) reference to the attributes of the
returned tuple. Or at best an exposure of the implementation. :)

>>Joel Reymont wrote:
>>> I think this should do what I want
>>> 	select trunc(distance * 10.)/10., count(*)
>>> 	from doc_ads
>>> 	group by 1 order by 1
>>>   Thanks, Joel

In response to


pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Stefan KellerDate: 2011-04-30 23:34:33
Subject: Values larger than 1/3 of a buffer page cannot be indexed (hstore)
Previous:From: Dimitri FontaineDate: 2011-04-30 19:56:48
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Core Team

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group