Is there a [straightforward] way to order results *first*, *then* group by another column, with SQL?

Question

I see that in SQL, the GROUP BY has to precede ORDER BY expression. Does this imply that ordering is done after grouping discards identical rows/columns?

Because I s

Answer 1

According to your new rules (tested with PostgreSQL)

Query You'd Want:

SELECT    pr.phone_nr, pr.payed_ts, pr.payed_until_ts 
FROM      payment_receipts pr
JOIN      users
          ON (pr.phone_nr = users.phone_nr)
   JOIN      (select phone_nr, max(payed_until_ts) as payed_until_ts 
              from payment_receipts 
              group by phone_nr
             ) sub
             ON (    pr.phone_nr       = sub.phone_nr 
                 AND pr.payed_until_ts = sub.payed_until_ts)
ORDER BY  pr.phone_nr, pr.payed_ts, pr.payed_until_ts;

Original Answer (with updates):

CREATE TABLE foo (a NUMERIC, b TEXT, DATE);

INSERT INTO foo VALUES 
   (1,'a','2010-07-30'),
   (1,'b','2010-07-30'),
   (1,'c','2010-07-31'),
   (1,'d','2010-07-31'),
   (1,'a','2010-07-29'),
   (1,'c','2010-07-29'),
   (2,'a','2010-07-29'),
   (2,'a','2010-08-01');

-- table contents
SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY c,a,b;
 a | b |     c      
---+---+------------
 1 | a | 2010-07-29
 1 | c | 2010-07-29
 2 | a | 2010-07-29
 1 | a | 2010-07-30
 1 | b | 2010-07-30
 1 | c | 2010-07-31
 1 | d | 2010-07-31
 2 | a | 2010-08-01

-- The following solutions both retrieve records based on the latest date
--    they both return the same result set, solution 1 is faster, solution 2
--    is easier to read

-- Solution 1: 
SELECT    foo.a, foo.b, foo.c 
FROM      foo
JOIN      (select a, max(c) as c from foo group by a) bar
  ON      (foo.a=bar.a and foo.c=bar.c)
ORDER BY  foo.a, foo.b, foo.c;

-- Solution 2: 
SELECT    a, b, MAX(c) AS c 
FROM      foo main
GROUP BY  a, b
HAVING    MAX(c) = (select max(c) from foo sub where main.a=sub.a group by a)
ORDER BY  a, b;

 a | b |     c      
---+---+------------
 1 | c | 2010-07-31
 1 | d | 2010-07-31
 2 | a | 2010-08-01
(3 rows)  

Comment:
1 is returned twice because their are multiple b values. This is acceptable (and advised). Your data should never have this problem, because c is based on b's value.