From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Yeah, this is a fairly obvious thing to want to do with a user-written > aggregate. It does not work in released versions, because the planner > does not notice that the inner SELECT's output ordering matches what > the GROUP BY needs, and so it inserts an additional Sort plan step > above the sub-select (you can see this if you look at EXPLAIN output). > Unfortunately, on most platforms qsort() isn't stable and will not > preserve the ordering of its input for equal keys. So you lose the > minor ordering by seq_no in the re-sort.
Most grateful for the rapid response Tom. Knowing that, I can work around by iterating through the firs at the application level. Regards Julian Scarfe PS: you shouldn't be working on a Sunday, it's bad for you ;-) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
