Re: bad execution plan for subselects containing windowing-function
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: bad execution plan for subselects containing windowing-function |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 25915.1263490925@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: bad execution plan for subselects containing windowing-function (Andreas Kretschmer <akretschmer@spamfence.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: bad execution plan for subselects containing
windowing-function
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
Andreas Kretschmer <akretschmer@spamfence.net> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I see no bug here. Your second query asks for a much more complicated
>> computation, it's not surprising it takes longer.
> But sorry, I disagree. It is the same query with the same result. I can't see
> how the queries should return different results.
In the first query
select id, avg(value) over (partition by value) from values where id = 50 order by id;
the avg() calculations are being done over only rows with id = 50. In
the second query
select * from (select id, avg(value) over (partition by value) from values order by id) foo where id = 50;
they are being done over all rows. In this particular example you
happen to get the same result, but that's just because "avg(foo) over
partition by foo" is a dumb example --- it will necessarily just yield
identically foo. In more realistic computations the results would be
different.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: