--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com, "Ann W. Harrison"
<aharrison@i...> wrote:

> Dmitry,
> >
> > I'm pretty sure PG used a hash aggregate which really performs

better than a

> > sort aggregate.
> >
> Ok, thanks, I thought there was something like that.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Ann

Then why not implement it if you know that it performs better?

But in any event PG used Table Scans for it's results, except the
group by, where it used the STORE_NO index.

More than likely I could get even better results from PG if I
actually configured PG. Remember, I didn't configure anything.