I have found some SQL queries in an application I am examining like this:
SELECT DISTINCT
Company, Warehouse, Item,
SUM(quantity) OVER (PARTITION BY Company, War
Winner: GROUP BY
Some very rudimentary testing on a large table with unindexed columns showed that at least in my case the two queries generated a completely different query plan. The one for PARTITION BY
was significantly slower.
The GROUP BY
query plan included only a table scan and aggregation operation while the PARTITION BY
plan had two nested loop self-joins. The PARTITION BY
took about 2800ms on the second run, the GROUP BY
took only 500ms.
Winner: GROUP BY
Based on the opinions of the commenters here the PARTITION BY
is less readable for most developers so it will be probably also harder to maintain in the future.
Winner: PARTITION BY
PARTITION BY
gives you more flexibility in choosing the grouping columns. With GROUP BY
you can have only one set of grouping columns for all aggregated columns. With DISTINCT + PARTITION BY
you can have different column in each partition. Also on some DBMSs you can chose from more aggregation/analytic functions in the OVER
clause.