Aggregate columns with additional (distinct) filters

后端 未结 3 882
一个人的身影
一个人的身影 2020-11-22 10:32

This code works as expected, but I it\'s long and creepy.

select p.name, p.played, w.won, l.lost from

(select users.name, count(games.name) as played
from u         


        
3条回答
  •  逝去的感伤
    2020-11-22 11:13

    The aggregate FILTER clause in Postgres 9.4 or newer is shorter and faster:

    SELECT u.name
         , count(*) FILTER (WHERE g.winner_id  > 0)    AS played
         , count(*) FILTER (WHERE g.winner_id  = u.id) AS won
         , count(*) FILTER (WHERE g.winner_id <> u.id) AS lost
    FROM   games g
    JOIN   users u ON u.id IN (g.player_1_id, g.player_2_id)
    GROUP  BY u.name;
    
    • The manual
    • Postgres Wiki
    • Depesz blog post

    In Postgres 9.3 (or any version) this is still shorter and faster than nested sub-selects or CASE expressions:

    SELECT u.name
         , count(g.winner_id  > 0 OR NULL)    AS played
         , count(g.winner_id  = u.id OR NULL) AS won
         , count(g.winner_id <> u.id OR NULL) AS lost
    FROM   games g
    JOIN   users u ON u.id IN (g.player_1_id, g.player_2_id)
    GROUP  BY u.name;
    

    Details:

    • For absolute performance, is SUM faster or COUNT?

提交回复
热议问题