Gregory Stark <stark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I think "distinct" just doesn't know about hash aggregates yet. That's partly > an oversight and partly of a "feature" in that it gives a convenient way to > write a query which avoids them. I think it's also partly that "distinct" is > trickier to fix because it's the same codepath as "distinct on" which is > decidedly more complex than a simple "distinct". It's not an oversight :-(. But the DISTINCT/DISTINCT ON code is old, crufty, and tightly entwined with ORDER BY processing. It'd be nice to clean it all up someday, but the effort seems a bit out of proportion to the reward... regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
