Mike Adams wrote:
So.
The first query should pull all 'MOM' records that have one or more
corresponding, and possibly orphaned, unassigned receiving records
belonging to the same po_cd and item_cd.
The second query should pull all unassigned, and possibly orphaned
receiving records that have
Hi listers,
As a PG administrator, I'm trying to read technical data from pg_class table
to monitor tables and indexes space.
We are running a quite big postgres platform, with multiple databases,
multiples schemes in each database, and hundreds tables.
When I run the attach python script, I get
Patrick De Zlio wrote:
Hi listers,
As a PG administrator, I'm trying to read technical data from pg_class table
to monitor tables and indexes space.
We are running a quite big postgres platform, with multiple databases,
multiples schemes in each database, and hundreds tables.
When I run the a
Hi list,
I have a many-to-many relationship between movies and genres and, in the
link table I have a third field called which orders the "appropriateness" of
the relations within each movie.
For example:
movie_id, genre_id, relevance (i've used movie/genre titles for clarity
here, but in realit
On 10/16/07, Jamie Tufnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm taking a subset of all my genres, and I want to get ONE row for each
> movie in the subset alongside its most appropriate genre (whichever has the
> highest relevance). In other words, the best fit.
You didn't provide the expected output
--- Jamie Tufnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> movie_id, genre_id, relevance (i've used movie/genre titles for clarity
> here, but in reality they're id's)
>
> beverly hills cop, action, 2
> beverly hills cop, comedy, 1
> the heartbreak kid, comedy, 2
>
On Oct 16, 2007, at 12:14 , Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
the only difference was that he was modeling employees and
skillsets. IIRC, the terminology for
the improved model was the "full disjuctive" model.
Off chance, might the full disjunction work be relevant here?
http://pgfoundry.org/pr
Hi Everybody,
I have a table with a column of timestamp type. It is
known to postgres like this:
name| character varying | not null
value | character varying | not null
datecreated | timestamp without time zone | not null
when I do query
select
Oooops! I got it.
I was missing quotes.
It must have evaluated 2007-10-02 and used it as a
numerical constant 1995.
Sorry about commotion.
Tena
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Tena Sakai
Sent: Tue 10/16/2007 10:57 AM
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: [SQL] w
On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 10:57:03AM -0700, Tena Sakai wrote:
> select name, value, datecreated
>from mytable
> where datecreated > 2007-10-02;
^^
2007-10-02 is an arithmetic expression equivalent to 1995.
I think what you want is
WHERE datecreated >
On Oct 16, 2007, at 12:57 , Tena Sakai wrote:
select name, value, datecreated
from mytable
where datecreated > 2007-10-02;
where datecreated > '2007-10-02'
2007-10-02 = 1995.
# select current_date < 2007-10-31 as arithmetic_comparison,
current_date < '2007-10-31' as date_comparison;
"Tena Sakai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I was missing quotes.
> It must have evaluated 2007-10-02 and used it as a
> numerical constant 1995.
Actually, what you got was a *textual* comparison between '1995' and
the timestamp converted to text, which makes even less sense.
FWIW, as of PG 8.3 yo
12 matches
Mail list logo
