Re: [HACKERS] having and union in v7beta
От | Jose Soares |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] having and union in v7beta |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 38BB7E2F.C481BBC3@sferacarta.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | having and union in v7beta (Jose Soares <jose@sferacarta.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] having and union in v7beta
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Jose Soares <jose@sferacarta.com> writes: > > SELECT...HAVING, this last for example doesn't work. > > That's a rather strong statement, and in fact a provably false one. > How about a detailed bug report rather than "it doesn't work"? > > > SELECT ... UNION (is 3 / 4 times slow) > > Can't help you on that without more details, either. What is the > query exactly, what plan does EXPLAIN show, and what plan did you > get from 6.5? > > regards, tom lane -- Jose' Soares Bologna, Italy Jose@sferacarta.com ============================================================================ POSTGRESQL BUG REPORTTEMPLATE ============================================================================ Your name : Jose' Soares Your email address : Jose@SferaCarta.com System Configuration --------------------- Architecture (example: Intel Pentium) : Intel Pentium Operating System (example: Linux 2.0.26 ELF) : Linux 2.0.37 Elf PostgreSQL version (example: PostgreSQL-6.1) : PostgreSQL-v7.0 Compiler used (example: gcc 2.7.2) : gcc 2.7.2.3 Please enter a FULL description of your problem: ------------------------------------------------ Seems that I found a bug on HAVING clause Please describe a way to repeat the problem. Please try to provide a concise reproducible example, if at all possible: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I created a table like this one below: CREATE TABLE comuni (istat CHAR(06) PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL,nome CHAR(50) NOT NULL,provincia CHAR(02),codice_fiscale CHAR(04),cap CHAR(05),regione CHAR(03),distretto CHAR(04)); CREATE INDEX nome_comune_idx ON comuni (nome); I tried the following query : select * from comuni where nome in ( select nome from comuni group by nome having 1 < count(nome) ); on the above table populated with 8342 rows, PostgreSQL begins searching and I wait for hours without any result. If you know how this problem might be fixed, list the solution below: --------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't know, but I can send you my table data if you want it.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: