Wednesday, 24 February 2016

sql - PostgreSQL DISTINCT ON with different ORDER BY



I want to run this query:



SELECT DISTINCT ON (address_id) purchases.address_id, purchases.*
FROM purchases

WHERE purchases.product_id = 1
ORDER BY purchases.purchased_at DESC


But I get this error:




PG::Error: ERROR: SELECT DISTINCT ON expressions must match initial ORDER BY expressions





Adding address_id as first ORDER BY expression silences the error, but I really don't want to add sorting over address_id. Is it possible to do without ordering by address_id?


Answer



Documentation says:




DISTINCT ON ( expression [, ...] ) keeps only the first row of each set of rows where the given expressions evaluate to equal. [...] Note that the "first row" of each set is unpredictable unless ORDER BY is used to ensure that the desired row appears first. [...] The DISTINCT ON expression(s) must match the leftmost ORDER BY expression(s).




Official documentation




So you'll have to add the address_id to the order by.



Alternatively, if you're looking for the full row that contains the most recent purchased product for each address_id and that result sorted by purchased_at then you're trying to solve a greatest N per group problem which can be solved by the following approaches:



The general solution that should work in most DBMSs:



SELECT t1.* FROM purchases t1
JOIN (
SELECT address_id, max(purchased_at) max_purchased_at
FROM purchases

WHERE product_id = 1
GROUP BY address_id
) t2
ON t1.address_id = t2.address_id AND t1.purchased_at = t2.max_purchased_at
ORDER BY t1.purchased_at DESC


A more PostgreSQL-oriented solution based on @hkf's answer:



SELECT * FROM (

SELECT DISTINCT ON (address_id) *
FROM purchases
WHERE product_id = 1
ORDER BY address_id, purchased_at DESC
) t
ORDER BY purchased_at DESC


Problem clarified, extended and solved here: Selecting rows ordered by some column and distinct on another


No comments:

Post a Comment

c++ - Does curly brackets matter for empty constructor?

Those brackets declare an empty, inline constructor. In that case, with them, the constructor does exist, it merely does nothing more than t...