[SQL] Storing/sorting hex data in PostgreSQL

2009-07-20 Thread JJ
I am parsing a map file and storing the hi, mid and low byte values of
symbol addresses in a comma separated value (.csv) file.  I  am then
importing this data into a PostgreSQL database with the copy
command.

The problem is that I want to sort and query the database based on the
hex addresses; from within another program using Npgsql (a .Net data
server for PostgreSQL).

How can I store hex values in PostgreSQL and sort and query them?

-- 
Sent via pgsql-sql mailing list (pgsql-sql@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-sql


[SQL] VIEW on lookup table

2004-02-29 Thread JJ Gabor

Hello all,

I have a lookup table consisting of 100,000+ rows.

99% of the lookup values resolve to 'Unknown'.

Building the lookup table takes a long time.

I would like to remove the 'Unknown' entries from the
table and provide a VIEW to emulate them.

The VIEW would need to provide all 100,000+ rows by 
using the reduced lookup data and generating the 
remaining values on the fly.

The lookup table structure:

CREATE TABLE lookup_data (

id1 INTEGER,
id2 INTEGER,
name TEXT,

PRIMARY KEY (id1, id2)
);

id1 is an INTEGER; from 0 through to 50,000+
id2 is an INTEGER; either 9 or 16.

Example data:

INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (1, 9, 'a');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (1, 16, 'b');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (2, 9, 'c');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (2, 16, 'd');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (3, 9, 'e');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (3, 16, 'f');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (4, 9, 'g');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (4, 16, 'h');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (8, 9, 'i');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (8, 16, 'j');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (10, 9, 'k');
INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (10, 16, 'l');
..

In the example data, entries where id1 is 5,6,7,9 are 'Unknown';

The VIEW would return:

id1, id2, name
1,   9,   'a'
1,   16,  'b'
2,   9,   'c'
2,   16,  'd'
3,   9,   'e'
3,   16,  'f'
4,   9,   'g'
4,   16,  'h'
5,   9,   'Unknown'
5,   16,  'Unknown'
6,   9,   'Unknown'
6,   16,  'Unknown'
7,   9,   'Unknown'
7,   16,  'Unknown'
8,   9,   'i'
8,   16,  'j'
9,   9,   'Unknown'
9,   16,  'Unknown'
10,  9,   'k'
10,  16,  'l'

I am using Postgres 7.2.1, which prevents me using a 
function to return a result set.

Can I achieve this in pure SQL?

Many thanks,
JJ Gabor.










---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?

   http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html


Re: [SQL] VIEW on lookup table

2004-03-07 Thread JJ Gabor


> Yes. If you create a table with all of the values, 1 to 100,000+, and then 
> join that with lookup_data, using a "left outer join", and then use a 
> case statement for the value -- when NULL, 'Unknown', then it should 
> work.

This would still require constructing a large table, which is what I
want to avoid.

> I would look at bending the requirements a bit before I do this. Why do 
> you want the string "Unknown" and not NULL? What is this table  going to 
> be used for? Also, just because you can't write a function in the 
> database to do this doesn't mean you can't write a function in perl or 
> python outside of the database to do it.

The technology used to access the database does not cope very well
with NULL/missing rows/colunns :/

As it turns out, the lookup table has been ditched.

> Also, seriously consider upgrading to 7.4.1. 7.2 is ancient and really 
> shouldn't be used anymore.

Mutch as I would like to, this is not an option.

Thanks for your help,
JJ


On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 08:39:12AM -0800, Jonathan M. Gardner wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Friday 27 February 2004 2:18 pm, JJ Gabor wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I have a lookup table consisting of 100,000+ rows.
> >
> > 99% of the lookup values resolve to 'Unknown'.
> >
> > Building the lookup table takes a long time.
> >
> > I would like to remove the 'Unknown' entries from the
> > table and provide a VIEW to emulate them.
> >
> > The VIEW would need to provide all 100,000+ rows by
> > using the reduced lookup data and generating the
> > remaining values on the fly.
> >
> > The lookup table structure:
> >
> > CREATE TABLE lookup_data (
> >
> > id1 INTEGER,
> > id2 INTEGER,
> > name TEXT,
> >
> > PRIMARY KEY (id1, id2)
> > );
> >
> > id1 is an INTEGER; from 0 through to 50,000+
> > id2 is an INTEGER; either 9 or 16.
> >
> > Example data:
> >
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (1, 9, 'a');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (1, 16, 'b');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (2, 9, 'c');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (2, 16, 'd');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (3, 9, 'e');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (3, 16, 'f');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (4, 9, 'g');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (4, 16, 'h');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (8, 9, 'i');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (8, 16, 'j');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (10, 9, 'k');
> > INSERT INTO lookup_data (id1, id2, name) VALUES (10, 16, 'l');
> > ..
> >
> > In the example data, entries where id1 is 5,6,7,9 are 'Unknown';
> >
> > The VIEW would return:
> >
> > id1, id2, name
> > 1,   9,   'a'
> > 1,   16,  'b'
> > 2,   9,   'c'
> > 2,   16,  'd'
> > 3,   9,   'e'
> > 3,   16,  'f'
> > 4,   9,   'g'
> > 4,   16,  'h'
> > 5,   9,   'Unknown'
> > 5,   16,  'Unknown'
> > 6,   9,   'Unknown'
> > 6,   16,  'Unknown'
> > 7,   9,   'Unknown'
> > 7,   16,  'Unknown'
> > 8,   9,   'i'
> > 8,   16,  'j'
> > 9,   9,   'Unknown'
> > 9,   16,  'Unknown'
> > 10,  9,   'k'
> > 10,  16,  'l'
> >
> > I am using Postgres 7.2.1, which prevents me using a
> > function to return a result set.
> >
> > Can I achieve this in pure SQL?
> 
> Yes. If you create a table with all of the values, 1 to 100,000+, and then 
> join that with lookup_data, using a "left outer join", and then use a 
> case statement for the value -- when NULL, 'Unknown', then it should 
> work.
> 
> I would look at bending the requirements a bit before I do this. Why do 
> you want the string "Unknown" and not NULL? What is this table  going to 
> be used for? Also, just because you can't write a function in the 
> database to do this doesn't mean you can't write a function in perl or 
> python outside of the database to do it.
> 
> Also, seriously consider upgrading to 7.4.1. 7.2 is ancient and really 
> shouldn't be used anymore.
> 
> - -- 
> Jonathan Gardner
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFASK0wqp6r/MVGlwwRAub2AKCUcqvFvkD1KjXLEeg8osybgw5kqwCgiq8W
> YiJY3ZYsAXNfjjBTCF0vGKE=
> =5EIl
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-

---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster