> On 21 Sep 2018, at 17:49, Durgamahesh Manne <maheshpostgr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <Query>
Considering how hard you try to get rid of duplicates, I'm quite convinced that
you're at least short a few join conditions. Getting rid of duplicates early
has the added benefit of having to aggregate fewer rows, which should
drastically improve the performance of this query.
In addition, your approach of using both distinct and group by raises a red
flag that you're fighting symptoms (most likely: duplicate results) without
understanding their causes. I can't think of a single situation where both are
justified in the same (sub-)query.
Alban Hertroys
--
If you can't see the forest for the trees,
cut the trees and you'll find there is no forest.
