Thank you very much for your response. However, I'm unclear what you want me to substitute for sum(...)?
select '1' as "num_ads", sum(...) from (select a.userid from user_event_stg2 a, user_region b where a.userid = b.userid and b.region_code = 1000 and a.messagetype = 'impression' group by a.userid having count(a.userid) = 1) group by num_ads; I was able to eliminate that sub-select per your recommendation. That makes things a bit easier. Thanks. On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:29 PM, David Johnston <pol...@yahoo.com> wrote: > My prior comment simply answers your question. You likely can rewrite > your > query so that a separate grouping layer is not needed (or rather the group > by would exist in the main query and you minimize the case/sub-select > column > queries and use aggregates and case instead). > > David J. > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/pivot-query-with-count-tp5752072p5752078.html > Sent from the PostgreSQL - sql mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql >
