comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/21/2005 12:46:00 PM: > > Basically it boils down to the fact that with SQL you have to use > some other way of telling > > each group apart other than position (or interposition, as you say > in your example). The fact > > that you have entries in your table from user1, user1, user2, > user1, user2, user3, and user1 > > doesn't necessarily mean that user1 logged off each time so that > user2 or user3 could login, > > does it? If that's actually the case, assign a unique tracking > number to each login event and > > group your activities by that. > There are no logins; it's one page linked to by an AIM profile, and > the only reason someone would come twice is if they refreshed the > page. So I can't group them in the query?
Let's work through another example. Your log table (I am guessing that's what it is) has entries (listed in chronological order) from the following users: U1, U2, U1, U1, U2, U2, U3, U1. How would you like to see that information GROUPed and what does that grouping represent (physically). In essence, I am asking you to describe what information you are determining by the grouping process, what does each GROUP mean to you? Shawn Green Database Administrator Unimin Corporation - Spruce Pine
