I have the following senario.
I have a tracking system. The system will record the status of an object
regularly, all the status records are stored in one table. And it will keep
a history of maximum 1000 status record for each object it tracks. The
maximum objects the system will track is
Hello,
I'm having a problem using foreign keys, or at least in a way i find good.
Basicly I have a table I wish to use as a foreign key with lookup "id" and
"code", like:
1,a
1,b
1,c
2,a
2,d
I have of course an UNIQUE on (id,code). However, in the table I want the key
to apply to, I only hav
> > Any ideas on how to achieve this? I would like to let the original sql
> > code stay original. I can prepare postgres before executing the sql if
> > this makes it easier to acheive the goal
>
> Have a look at CREATE RULE.
>
> Tim
>
Ok, you mean I could create a rule for the table, then I let
it runs without alias t1. before fieldname id after SET, so:
UPDATE table1 t1
SET id =
(SELECT t3.id FROM table2 t2,table3 t3, table1 t1
WHERE t3.field = t2.field
AND t2.id = t1.id
AND t1.id <> t3.id)
On Jul 28, 2009, at 5:10 PM, nha wrote:
Hello,
Le 28/07/09 14:25, Daryl Richter a écrit :
On Jul 28, 2009, at 5:58 AM, Gau, Hans-Jürgen wrote:
hello list,
i have some problems with an sql-statement which runs on oracle but
not on postgresql (i want update only if result of SELECT is not
emp
On 2009-07-28, Axe wrote:
> I have a problem where I want to tweak a simple select in an
> "unobtrusive way". Imagine I have the following select statement:
> "SELECT name FROM customer LIMIT 1" and I get a normal result set from
> this. But, could I,maybe by defining some other function or simila
Hello again,
Le 29/07/09 12:21, nha a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> Le 29/07/09 11:48, Gau, Hans-Jürgen a écrit :
>> Sorry, it's a lapse by copying and simplification the original version. that
>> is correct:
>>
>> UPDATE table1 t1
>> SET (t1.id) =
>> (SELECT t3.id FROM table2 t2,table
Hello,
Le 29/07/09 11:48, Gau, Hans-Jürgen a écrit :
> Sorry, it's a lapse by copying and simplification the original version. that
> is correct:
>
> UPDATE table1 t1
> SET (t1.id) =
> (SELECT t3.id FROM table2 t2,table3 t3, table1 t1
> WHERE t3.field = t2.fie
Sorry, it's a lapse by copying and simplification the original version. that
is correct:
UPDATE table1 t1
SET (t1.id) =
(SELECT t3.id FROM table2 t2,table3 t3, table1 t1
WHERE t3.field = t2.field
AND t2.id = t1.id
