Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andreas Kretschmer <akretsch...@spamfence.net> writes: > > No question, this is a silly query, but the problem is the 2nd query: it > > is obviously not possible for the planner to put the where-condition > > into the subquery. > > Well, yeah: it might change the results of the window functions. > I see no bug here. Your second query asks for a much more complicated > computation, it's not surprising it takes longer.
Thank you for the fast answer. But sorry, I disagree. It is the same query with the same result. I can't see how the queries should return different results. What have i overlooked? tia, Andreas -- Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect. (Linus Torvalds) "If I was god, I would recompile penguin with --enable-fly." (unknown) Kaufbach, Saxony, Germany, Europe. N 51.05082°, E 13.56889° -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
