> On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 11:37 -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote: >> Which means it *should* work, but first I would need to clean up the data >> and find the duplicates. I was hoping this might work: >> >> SELECT geocode, count(*) >> FROM a >> GROUP BY a.geocode >> HAVING count(*) > 1; > > Maybe you could use a self-join as a workaround for now, just to clean > up the data? > > SELECT geocode, other_columns from a a1, a a2 where a1.other_columns <> > a2.other_columns and a1.geocode ~= a2.geocode;
That worked perfectly - turned out it was just two rows. And subsequently executing the exclusion constraint on "=~" also worked perfectly as expected. The larger issue I face with now is slightly out of my control without further hacking. I'm developing an app with Django and I wrote an extension that allows me to use the point type natively in Python. I ran into the original issue while an automatically generated query was executed in the admin section. I know this could be viewed as something pertaining to Django, but the goal I had in mind was making PostgreSQL functionality more accessible in a different software layer. I will find a workaround for the above, as I am sure I can do some application-level hacking. Thanks for your help! Jonathan -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
