Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-16 Thread Alexander Skwar
So sprach »Sinisa Milivojevic« am 2001-07-16 um 14:20:07 +0300 : > MySQL 4.0 will be this autumn. Very fine! Thanks a lot! Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quote (german) http://quote.6x.to (english) Homepage: http://www.digitalprojects.com | http://www.iso-top.de

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-16 Thread Sinisa Milivojevic
Alexander Skwar writes: > o sprach Sinisa Milivojevic am 2001-07-14 um 15:24:32 +0300: > > Unions will soon come in 4.0. > > Yes, I know, bad question, but anyhow: How soon is 4.0 going to come? > Tomorrow :), end of the month, end of the year? > > PS: database,sql,query,table > > Alexander Skw

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-16 Thread Sinisa Milivojevic
Kevin Smith writes: > Is there no easy way to do this in the current version (3.29.39) without > using a program that loops through to perform each update? > > Thanks, > > Kevin Take a look at updel_x.cc example in MySQL++. -- Regards, __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-15 Thread John Meyer
At 02:13 PM 7/15/01 +0300, Sinisa Milivojevic wrote: >Multi-table updates should come in 4.0, while sub-selects will come in >4.1. Not to be a nag, but when will 4.x be here? > John Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Programmer If we didn't have Microsoft, we'd have to blame ourselves for all of our pr

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-15 Thread Kevin Smith
D]> Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 12:13 PM Subject: Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation? > Kevin Smith writes: > > Will the following be in version 4 as well? > > > > UPDATE table1 > > SET cola = SELECT [colb] > > FROM table2 > > WHERE table1.

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-15 Thread Alexander Skwar
o sprach Sinisa Milivojevic am 2001-07-14 um 15:24:32 +0300: > Unions will soon come in 4.0. Yes, I know, bad question, but anyhow: How soon is 4.0 going to come? Tomorrow :), end of the month, end of the year? PS: database,sql,query,table Alexander Skwar -- How to quote: http://learn.to/quo

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-15 Thread Sinisa Milivojevic
Kevin Smith writes: > Will the following be in version 4 as well? > > UPDATE table1 > SET cola = SELECT [colb] > FROM table2 > WHERE table1.id = table2.id > > And sub-selects as well? > > Thanks, > > Kevin Multi-table updates should come in 4.0, while sub-selects will come in 4.1. -- Regard

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-14 Thread Kevin Smith
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 1:24 PM Subject: Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation? > Hi! > > Unions will soon come in 4.0. > > Meanwhile, your query can utilize indices if you have a co

Re: Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-14 Thread Sinisa Milivojevic
Hi! Unions will soon come in 4.0. Meanwhile, your query can utilize indices if you have a composite index on seller and buyer. -- Regards, __ ___ ___ __ / |/ /_ __/ __/ __ \/ /Mr. Sinisa Milivojevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> / /|_/ / // /\ \/ /_/ / /__ MySQL AB, FullTime Dev

Any workaround for no "union" operation?

2001-07-13 Thread William M. Shubert
Hi. I just finished a database that will be supporting another system, and right now it is running on Postgres, but I was unhappy with that for various reasons. I converted my data to mysql, and most things look good: in the ways I care about, performance is much better, EXCEPT for one issue which