On 2013-01-16, James Sharrett wrote:
> The problem I have is that I get nothing back when the COPY is run inside
> the function other than what I explicitly return from the function so I
> don't have anything to parse. It's odd that the record count in the
> function is treated differently than f
Hi,
I'd like to know, per column, how many values were changed by my query.
I have a working example, but i am curious what you people think about it.
Is it efficient? I have to make a self join, but i don't see a faster way.
Here's the example:
-
drop table if exists tab1 ;
create t
How about separating count query from update statement.
I found a bit performance improvement from your example.
with 10 rows, fastest time in 10 times try
yours: 989.679 ms
mine: 719.739 ms
query
---
(same DDL, DML)
WITH cnt AS (
SELECT
count(CASE WHEN tab1.a >= 60 THEN 1 EN
Hello!
I trade futures contracts and I have a PostgreSQL 9.2 database that keeps
track of all of my trading activity. The table includes columns for the
futures contract, the entry and exit dates and the profit for that
particular trade. Now, futures contracts expire, so within a trade being
ind
Did you try:
select substring(contract from 1 for 1), min(entry_date), max(entry_date),
sum(profit)
from contract_table
group by 1;
Venky Kandaswamy
Principal Engineer, Adchemy Inc.
925-200-7124
From: pgsql-sql-ow...@
