RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread neal
- From: Herman Verkade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 12:14 AM To: 'neal' Subject: RE: multi-table select (not a join) You want to do a UNION. See: http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/UNION.html Regards, Herman Verkade -Original Message- From: neal [mailto

RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread Paul DuBois
-table select (not a join) You want to do a UNION. See: http://www.mysql.com/doc/en/UNION.html Regards, Herman Verkade -Original Message- From: neal [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 September 2002 07:57 To: mySQL Subject: multi-table select (not a join) How do you

RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread neal
queries and recieve back two seperate resultsets. Neal -Original Message- From: Paul DuBois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:21 AM To: neal; mySQL Subject: RE: multi-table select (not a join) At 0:23 -0700 9/23/02, neal wrote: Oh man! Yeah, you're right

RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread Paul DuBois
queries and recieve back two seperate resultsets. Neal -Original Message- From: Paul DuBois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 9:21 AM To: neal; mySQL Subject: RE: multi-table select (not a join) At 0:23 -0700 9/23/02, neal wrote: Oh man! Yeah, you're right

RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread neal
AM To: neal; mySQL Subject: RE: multi-table select (not a join) At 9:55 -0700 9/23/02, neal wrote: Thanks for the suggestion but this would actually create a new table, correct (the first statement that is)? I just want a resultset with these values, without writing to disk. Then you must

Re: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread Jesse Sheidlower
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 11:20:49AM -0500, Paul DuBois wrote: I had a question about the use of the UNION command in this context. The original poster asked about getting the name of the _table_ as well as some other data, which would seem to be relatively necessary for doing many types of

RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread Paul DuBois
statement. Thanks. Neal -Original Message- From: Paul DuBois [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2002 10:09 AM To: neal; mySQL Subject: RE: multi-table select (not a join) At 9:55 -0700 9/23/02, neal wrote: Thanks for the suggestion but this would actually create a new

Re: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread Paul DuBois
At 13:16 -0400 9/23/02, Jesse Sheidlower wrote: On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 11:20:49AM -0500, Paul DuBois wrote: I had a question about the use of the UNION command in this context. The original poster asked about getting the name of the _table_ as well as some other data, which would seem to be

RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread Paul DuBois
At 12:08 -0500 9/23/02, Paul DuBois wrote: At 9:55 -0700 9/23/02, neal wrote: Thanks for the suggestion but this would actually create a new table, correct (the first statement that is)? I just want a resultset with these values, without writing to disk. Then you must upgrade to 4.x so that you

RE: multi-table select (not a join)

2002-09-23 Thread Herman Verkade
Jesse Sheidlower wrote: How do you get the table name returned as part of the query results? Or am I misunderstanding how one would work with the results? Try: SELECT *,'TABLEA' FROM TABLEA UNION SELECT *,'OTHERTABLE' FROM OTHERTABLE Herman