On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 15:39 +0100, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Mario Splivalo wrote:
> >
> > Of course, if it returns no rows, I'm presented with an error, saying:
> >
> > ERROR: record "rec" has no field "_qv"
> >
> > This is logical. My question would be is there a way around this
> > withouth fi
Frank Bax wrote:
Are you saying that you WANT to generate a cross-join, score the
millions of results and then pick the best 10? It's doing what you
want, but you'd like it to be faster.
Or are you saying that you'd like to avoid the explosion in rows
altogether?
In either case - I don't su
Richard Huxton wrote:
Frank Bax wrote:
Are you saying that you WANT to generate a cross-join, score the
millions of results and then pick the best 10? It's doing what you
want, but you'd like it to be faster.
Or are you saying that you'd like to avoid the explosion in rows
altogether?
In
I have 3 tables:
CREATE TABLE orders( id int4
SERIAL, id_ag int4, id_modell int4 ->> this is linked
to the modell.id
)
CREATE TABLE
modell( id int4 SERIAL, id_hersteller int4)
CREATE TABLE contactpartner( id int4
SERIAL, id_ag int4, ->> this is linked to order.id_ag or
modell.i
I have a table that has some columns which store 'custom' fields so the
content varies according to the user that the row belongs to. For one
of the groups of users the field is a date (the type of the field is
'text' though). I'm trying to perform a query where it only returns
values in a certai
[Please copy the mailing list on replies.]
On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 04:28:47PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. It helped a lot. I was goint to ask similar question
> regarding regular expression, but this time I need not the numeric part. What
> I
> mean is;
> say that this
As an example:
CREATE TABLE userdata (
userdata_id serial NOT NULL,
user_id smallint,
data text
);
CREATE TABLE users (
user_id serial NOT NULL,
name text,
"type" smallint
);
INSERT INTO userdata (userdata_id, user_id, data) VALUES (1, 1,
'2005-01-01');
INSERT INTO userda
Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Rick Schumeyer wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what I was thinking, but I tried the following query in pg:
> >
> > SELECT * FROM t GROUP BY state;
> >
> > pg returns an error.
> >
> > Mysql, OTOH, returns the first row for each state. (T
This isn't a PostgreSQL issue, but rather one of understanding how
regular expressions work in general. See the previously mentioned
"Pattern Matching" section of the PostgreSQL documentation for the
PostgreSQL-specific details, and use a search engine to find a
regular expression tutorial; they'
Collin Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have a table that has some columns which store 'custom' fields so the
> content varies according to the user that the row belongs to. For one
> of the groups of users the field is a date (the type of the field is
> 'text' though). I'm trying to perfo
On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 16:54, Greg Stark wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Rick Schumeyer wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not sure what I was thinking, but I tried the following query in pg:
> > >
> > > SELECT * FROM t GROUP BY state;
> > >
> > > pg returns an erro
Collin Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> WHERE cust3 <> ''
> AND cust3::text::timestamp > CURRENT_DATE - interval '1 month'
> This results in the error 'ERROR: date/time field value out of range:
> "052-44-5863"'. Now that is obviously not a valid date but there
> is actually more to the
> Not always, but I'd rather get the right answer with difficulty than
the
wrong one with ease. :)
agreed.
I made it a point to mention this so called "feature" in my book.
This is a bug they never fixed and they decided to call it a feature.
It is, imo, *ridiculous*.
Regards,
Anthony
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> SELECT *
> FROM
> (
> SELECT u.user_id, ud.data
> FROM users u, userdata ud
> WHERE u.user_id = ud.user_id
> AND u.type = 1
> ) subusers
> WHERE subusers.data::text::date < now();
> So my question is how does this query ever even SEE the row con
Scott Marlowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hehe. When I turn on my windshield wipers and my airbag deploys, is it
> a documented "feature" if the dealership told me about this behaviour
> ahead of time?
Well it's more like my car where the dashboard dims when I turn on my
headlights which ann
I have a table like:
CREATE TABLE products (
id int,
status int,
last_status_change timestamp DEFAULT now()
);
What I would like is that whenever the status is changed the
last_status_change timestamp is updated to the current time. I have had
a look at the rules and what I want would
Jeff Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> last_status_change timestamp DEFAULT now()
> What I would like is that whenever the status is changed the
> last_status_change timestamp is updated to the current time.
For this you use an ON UPDATE trigger; rules are not a good way to solve
it. Se
At 09:00 AM 10/12/05, Daryl Richter wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
Frank Bax wrote:
Are you saying that you WANT to generate a cross-join, score the
millions of results and then pick the best 10? It's doing what you
want, but you'd like it to be faster.
Or are you saying that you'd like to a
Greg Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think most MySQL users don't stumble on it, they learn it as the way
> to handle the common use case when you join a master table against a
> detail table and then want to aggregate all the detail records. In
> standard SQL you have to write GROUP BY ... a
> Splitting locations into subsets (like 2,2,3) doesn't work
> because it is possible that low values in one location can be offset
by
> high values in another location, and still result in an excellent
combo.
>
> The good news is these suggestions got me thinking outside
> the box. I think I
Tom Lane wrote:
>Jeff Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>last_status_change timestamp DEFAULT now()
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>What I would like is that whenever the status is changed the
>>last_status_change timestamp is updated to the current time.
>>
>>
>
>For this you use an ON UPDA
Jeff Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks. Triggers was my first thought, but chapter 35 on Triggers didn't
> really indicate a way I could do this easily and scared me with a lot of
> c code.
Yeah. This is a documentation issue that's bothered me for awhile.
The problem is that we treat
> The problem is that we treat the PL languages as add-ons and therefore
> the documentation of the "core" system shouldn't rely on them ... but
> that leaves us presenting C-code triggers as the only examples in
> chapter 35. There is a paragraph in there suggesting you go look at
> the PL langu
> I don't see why you think people stumble on this by accident. I think
it's
> actually an extremely common need.
I can't imagine how that's a common need at all.
It makes no sense.
When you add an additional column in the select, it must be included in
the group by as it changes the meaning of
On Oct 13, 2005, at 11:52 , Tom Lane wrote:
Jeff Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Thanks. Triggers was my first thought, but chapter 35 on Triggers
didn't
really indicate a way I could do this easily and scared me with a
lot of
c code.
Yeah. This is a documentation issue that's bo
Tom,
Don't do it man...
It's not the same. The standard has it wrong (that or I misunderstood
your
explanation). But this statement:
> you shouldn't have to explicitly list the other columns from that
> table --- they are guaranteed to have unique values per group anyway
...is way off.
By c
"Anthony Molinaro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By changing the values in the select/group by you are changing
> Group! How can you arbitrarily add or exclude a column?
> You can't do it.
Go back and reread the previous posts again. You missed the whole point.
--
greg
--
Greg,
You'll have to pardon me...
I saw this comment:
"I don't see why you think people stumble on this by accident.
I think it's actually an extremely common need."
Which, if referring to the ability to have items in the select that do
not
need to be included in the group, (excluding consta
"Anthony Molinaro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greg,
> You'll have to pardon me...
>
> I saw this comment:
>
> "I don't see why you think people stumble on this by accident.
> I think it's actually an extremely common need."
>
> Which, if referring to the ability to have items in the sele
Is it possible to have a single trigger on multiple tables
simultaneously? Example:
CREATE TRIGGER emp_cust_stamp BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE ON employees, customers
FOR EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE last_updated_stamp();
I tried something like the above but get an error message at the comma. I tri
Ferindo Middleton Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it possible to have a single trigger on multiple tables
> simultaneously? Example:
> CREATE TRIGGER emp_cust_stamp BEFORE INSERT OR UPDATE ON employees, customers
> FOR EACH ROW EXECUTE PROCEDURE last_updated_stamp();
No. You can use the
Greg,
Ok, I think I see where you're going (I don't agree, but I think
I get you now).
So, using your example of:
"dept_name is guaranteed to be the same for all records with the
same dept_id."
Here:
select d.deptno,d.dname
from emp e, dept d
where e.deptno=d.deptno
DEPTNO DNAME
--
32 matches
Mail list logo
