Have you tried "where recno IS NULL"?
- Original Message -
From: "Chris Ruprecht" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 7:05 PM
Subject: [SQL] Unknown values in int8 fields?
> Hi Chris,
>
> When I load records with copy from ... And one of the fields (
I've not been following this too closely but it sounds like you are
trying to COPY records from table A to table B, where the table B
also includes a serial value.
Here's an easy trick which I'm pretty sure will work: instead of
using COPY use SELECT INTO. It's much slower but I think it will
do
Hi Chris,
When I load records with copy from ... And one of the fields (last
one) is left empty, I want the default of nextval('sequence_table') to kick
in - but it doesn't.
Now, the field with a unique index on it stays blank. No big deal if I could
go and say 'update rate set recno = nextval('
"Josh Berkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Hmm, I just realized that there's a bug here: let's say you have
>>
>> CREATE VIEW latest AS
>> SELECT * FROM news ORDER BY story_timestamp DESC LIMIT 1;
>>
>> ie, this view gives you the latest news story.
> Why, exactly, do we need to support ORDER
Tom,
> Hmm, I just realized that there's a bug here: let's say you have
>
> CREATE VIEW latest AS
> SELECT * FROM news ORDER BY story_timestamp DESC LIMIT 1;
>
> ie, this view gives you the latest news story. If you do
>
> SELECT * FROM latest WHERE story_text LIKE '%Joe Smith%';
>
> what y
Finally got my act together and updated my PostgreSQL Notes. You can
access them from http://techdocs.postgresql.org (another plug for Justin ;-)
Changes include:
- downloadable zipped version
- short example of accessing PostgreSQL from PHP
- short example of accessing PostgreSQL from Perl (Pg
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Josh Berkus writes:
>> Hey! I thought you couldn't do ORDER BY in views ... yet I just did.
>> Is this a new thing, or am I just getting my Trasact-SQL and my
>> PostgreSQL mixed up again?
> I think it was allowed from 7.1 on to enable LIMIT in view
Josh:
You wondered:
>What happens if I put an ORDER BY in a view, then call an ORDER BY in a
>query, e.g.:
>
>CREATE VIEW test_view AS
>SELECT client_name, city, zip FROM clients
>WHERE zip IS NOT NULL
>ORDER BY zip;
>
>SELECT * FROM test_view ORDER BY city;
>
>Does the second ORDER BY override
Pater, Robbie, Bruce,
> > Hey! I thought you couldn't do ORDER BY in views ... yet I just
> did.
> > Is this a new thing, or am I just getting my Trasact-SQL and my
> > PostgreSQL mixed up again?
>
> I think it was allowed from 7.1 on to enable LIMIT in views to work
> sensibly.
Makes sense.
I think Tom fixed that in 7.1.X. That is why it now works.
> Tom, Stephan,
>
> Hey! I thought you couldn't do ORDER BY in views ... yet I just did.
> Is this a new thing, or am I just getting my Trasact-SQL and my
> PostgreSQL mixed up again?
>
> -Josh
>
>
>
> __AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIO
Josh Berkus writes:
> Hey! I thought you couldn't do ORDER BY in views ... yet I just did.
> Is this a new thing, or am I just getting my Trasact-SQL and my
> PostgreSQL mixed up again?
I think it was allowed from 7.1 on to enable LIMIT in views to work
sensibly.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL
I think PostgreSQL allows you to do an ORDER BY in a view, but the real
message is that it just doesn't make any sense. Remember that a view is
just a "virtual table", not a query. If you "order by" as part of it's
definition, there's no guarantee that the data will be orded when you SELECT
FROM l
Tom, Stephan,
Hey! I thought you couldn't do ORDER BY in views ... yet I just did.
Is this a new thing, or am I just getting my Trasact-SQL and my
PostgreSQL mixed up again?
-Josh
__AGLIO DATABASE SOLUTIONS___
Josh Berkus
C
13 matches
Mail list logo
