On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 06:14:59 -0600, Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Doing things as above is pretty much the same as normal distinct on > for purposes of which rows get selected. Of the possible rows that > might get returned for a specific set of values from the distinct on > expressions you will get the row that is first as ordered by the > expressions in the order by clause. If the order by clause isn't selective > enough there may be several rows that could be selected, but that is true > for how distinct on works now.
Specifically the interpretation I think makes sense is that SELECT DISTINCT ON (a, b, c) * FROM tablename ORDER BY d, e, f should be treated as equvialent to SELECT * FROM (SELECT DISTINCT ON (a, b, c) FROM tablename ORDER BY a, b, c, d, e, f) AS t ORDER BY d, e, f ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
