On Sat, 31 Aug 2019, Morris de Oryx wrote:
Your tributaries and fish master tables make sense. If I read your code
right, you're grouping by too many columns. I flattened the data into a
survey table for this simple example:
Morris,
I'm still learning about postgres groups. My approach is to
Your tributaries and fish master tables make sense. If I read your code
right, you're grouping by too many columns. I flattened the data into a
survey table for this simple example:
select tributary,
common_name,
scientific_name,
sum(count_value) as fish_seen,
count(cou
On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, John W Higgins wrote:
You are grouping by count_value which means that you are asking the system
to return a row for each different count_value.
John,
I didn't realize this.
So if you remove the f.count_value from the select statement (not the
sum(f.count_value)) - and
Tables hold data on fish counts by stream name, species, and (unreported)
collection dates. I'm trying to write a query that returns the total number
of each species in each stream.
The latest attempt is (lines wrapped by alpine; submitted as one line):
\copy (select f.stream_tribs, f.count_valu
