Hi!
> "Sinisa" == Sinisa Milivojevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sinisa> John Heitmann writes:
>> Thanks for the quick response.
>>
>> > > select t1.*, t2.name from t1, t2 where t2.id=t2_id;
>> >
>> > The above is actually expected behaviour, as you are not doing a join
>> > at all, but a
Hi!
> "Sinisa" == Sinisa Milivojevic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sinisa> John Heitmann writes:
>> Thanks for the quick response.
>>
>> > > select t1.*, t2.name from t1, t2 where t2.id=t2_id;
>> >
>> > The above is actually expected behaviour, as you are not doing a join
>> > at all, but a
John Heitmann writes:
> Thanks for the quick response.
>
> > > select t1.*, t2.name from t1, t2 where t2.id=t2_id;
> >
> > The above is actually expected behaviour, as you are not doing a join
> > at all, but a full Cartesian product.
>
> That t2_id is actually from t1. Sorry for the confusing
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 05:16:23PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Your message cannot be posted because it appears to be either spam or
> simply off topic to our filter. To bypass the filter you must include
> one of the following words in your message:
>
> sql,query
>
> If you just reply t
John Heitmann writes:
> Hello,
>
> I have come across a possible bug in MySQL that causes NULL values to
> be erroneously returned from a join.
>
> Problem: An inner join between two tables succeeds, but one column is
> erroneously returned as all NULL if the join occurs after a delete in
> tabl
Hello,
I have come across a possible bug in MySQL that causes NULL values to
be erroneously returned from a join.
Problem: An inner join between two tables succeeds, but one column is
erroneously returned as all NULL if the join occurs after a delete in
table 1.
Platforms Tested: 3.23.43 (Solar
