Rich, it looks to me like your SQL should work - I've never used
'!IN', always used 'NOT IN' instead, but that's not to say it won't
work.
I do note that you're missing the join criteria for your tables
classes, signups ...
Am I misunderstanding your question?
Dan
On 10/5/06, Rich [EMAIL
To select the contents of both into one table, you most likely want to use
the 'UNION' operator:
SELECT * FROM desktops
UNION
SELECT * FROM laptops
If you create the computers table before hand (you can see how you would
create either of the others with SHOW CREATE tablename), then you can just
Thank you Matt, I am using Mysql 3.23.58 on RH Linux 9... UNION isn't
supported on this version.
On Saturday 03 April 2004 15:20, Matt Chatterley wrote:
To select the contents of both into one table, you most likely want to use
the 'UNION' operator:
SELECT * FROM desktops
UNION
SELECT *
* Brad Tilley
create table computers
select * from desktops, laptops where
desktops.field_1 = laptops.field_1
...
Thank you Matt, I am using Mysql 3.23.58 on RH Linux 9... UNION isn't
supported on this version.
You can do it in two steps:
CREATE TABLE computers SELECT * FROM
There are two ways of handling this, the long way and the short way.
The long way is to prefix each ambiguously named column with the full table
name, as you have been doing. That *should* have worked for you since that
seems to be what you are doing in your example. Or did you literally write
debug,
is there any difference between:
a)
select lname, fname
from person_tb, details_tb
where mem_id = det_id
and fin = y;
and
b)
select lname, fname
from person_tb
where mem_id in (select det_id from details_tb where fin = y)
Yes, the first does give error free output. The
Hello All,
person_tb contains mem_id, lname and fname
details_tb contains det_id and fin.
They both contain other fields, but I don't care about them at this time.
I'm trying the following
select lname, fname
from person_tb, details_tb
where mem_id = det_id
and fin = y;
but it is
Trevor Rhodes wrote:
Hello All,
person_tb contains mem_id, lname and fname
details_tb contains det_id and fin.
They both contain other fields, but I don't care about them at this time. I'm
trying the following
select lname, fname
from person_tb, details_tb
where mem_id = det_id
and fin = y;
Daniel,
I have a question about determining which case
occurred when there are no matches - using two tables.
Scenario:
- two tables, one for photos, and one for collections
- zero or more photos can belong to a collection
- the database may not know the collection_id requested
At 10:55 AM + 3/29/02, DL Neil wrote:
Scenario:
- two tables, one for photos, and one for collections
- zero or more photos can belong to a collection
- the database may not know the collection_id requested
(i.e. the user on the browser side did something to request
a
At 10:55 AM + 3/29/02, DL Neil wrote:
We can hit:
a) no collection
b) a collection that hasn't had any photos moved/uploaded to it yet,
or..
c) a collection with one or more photos (the normal, everything's
fine case)
Let us know how you get on!
Thanks again DL, my first stab at using
11 matches
Mail list logo
