<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Jan 4, 11:48 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory Stark) wrote:
>
>> And what does the plan look like?
>
> It looks great in mysql!
Like what?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication sup
On Jan 4, 11:48 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory Stark) wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I've just spent a few hours searching and reading about the postgres
> > way of selecting distinct records. I understand the points made about
> > the ORDER BY limitation of DISTINCT ON, and the abiguity
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I've just spent a few hours searching and reading about the postgres
> way of selecting distinct records. I understand the points made about
> the ORDER BY limitation of DISTINCT ON, and the abiguity of GROUP BY,
> but I think there's a (simple, common) case that have
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've just spent a few hours searching and reading about the postgres
> way of selecting distinct records. I understand the points made about
> the ORDER BY limitation of DISTINCT ON, and the abiguity of GROUP BY,
> but I think there's a (simple, common) case that hav
I've just spent a few hours searching and reading about the postgres
way of selecting distinct records. I understand the points made about
the ORDER BY limitation of DISTINCT ON, and the abiguity of GROUP BY,
but I think there's a (simple, common) case that have been missed in
the discussion. Her
