Thread: Re: [SQL] What's wrong with this group by clause?
[forwarding to -hackers] On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:28:12 -0300, Franco Bruno Borghesi <franco@akyasociados.com.ar> wrote: >Below you can find a simplified example of a real case. >I don't understand why I'm getting the "john" record twice. ISTM you have found a Postgres 7.3 bug. I get one john withPostgreSQL 7.1.3 on i686-pc-cygwin, compiled by GCC 2.95.3-5 andPostgreSQL 7.2 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC 2.7.2.1 but two johns withPostgreSQL 7.3.2 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC 2.7.2.1 >/*EXAMPLE*/ >CREATE TABLE people >( > name TEXT >); >INSERT INTO people VALUES ('john'); >INSERT INTO people VALUES ('john'); >INSERT INTO people VALUES ('pete'); >INSERT INTO people VALUES ('pete'); >INSERT INTO people VALUES ('ernest'); >INSERT INTO people VALUES ('john'); > >SELECT > 0 AS field1, > 0 AS field2, > name >FROM > people >GROUP BY > field1, > field2, > name; > > field1 | field2 | name >--------+--------+-------- > 0 | 0 | john > 0 | 0 | pete > 0 | 0 | ernest > 0 | 0 | john >(4 rows) Same forSELECT 0 AS field1, 0 AS field2, name FROM people GROUP BY 1, 2, name; ServusManfred
Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg@aon.at> writes: > ISTM you have found a Postgres 7.3 bug. Yeah. Actually, the planner bug has been there a long time, but it was only latent until the parser stopped suppressing duplicate GROUP BY items: 2002-08-18 14:46 tgl * src/backend/parser/parse_clause.c: Remove optimization wherebyparser would make only one sort-list entry when two equal()targetlistitems were to be added to an ORDER BY or DISTINCT list. Although indeed this would make sorting fractionallyfaster bysometimes saving a comparison, it confuses the heck out of laterstages of processing, because it makesit look like the user wroteDISTINCT ON rather than DISTINCT. Bug reported byjoe@piscitella.com. 7.3 patch is attached if you need it. regards, tom lane *** src/backend/optimizer/plan/planner.c.orig Wed Mar 5 13:38:26 2003 --- src/backend/optimizer/plan/planner.c Thu Mar 13 11:21:16 2003 *************** *** 1498,1510 **** * are just dummies with no extra execution cost.) */ List *sort_tlist= new_unsorted_tlist(subplan->targetlist); int keyno = 0; List *gl; foreach(gl, groupClause) { GroupClause *grpcl = (GroupClause *) lfirst(gl); ! TargetEntry *te = nth(grpColIdx[keyno] - 1, sort_tlist); Resdom *resdom = te->resdom; /* --- 1498,1511 ---- * are just dummies with no extra execution cost.) */ List *sort_tlist= new_unsorted_tlist(subplan->targetlist); + int grpno = 0; int keyno = 0; List *gl; foreach(gl, groupClause) { GroupClause *grpcl = (GroupClause *) lfirst(gl); ! TargetEntry *te = nth(grpColIdx[grpno] - 1, sort_tlist); Resdom *resdom = te->resdom; /* *************** *** 1518,1523 **** --- 1519,1525 ---- resdom->reskey = ++keyno; resdom->reskeyop = grpcl->sortop; } + grpno++; } Assert(keyno > 0);