On Jun 6, 2006, at 12:32 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 09:20:13AM -0700, codeWarrior wrote:
I would hope that your choice to use postgreSQL is because it is
superior
technology that scales well financially... not because you get a
warm fuzzy
from all your friends on
Personally: I think your posts are getting annoying. This isn't SQLCentral.
Learn to write your own damn queries or even better - buy a book on SQL...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
hi all, i posted this problem on the novice thread,
but it makes much more sense to
Personally: I think your posts are getting annoying. This isn't SQLCentral.
Learn to write your own damn queries or even better - buy a book on SQL...
Personally: (being a newbie with an interest in developing a strong rdms
skillset) I've enjoyed
following threads like these. Even when the
Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
Personally: I think your posts are getting annoying. This isn't SQLCentral.
Learn to write your own damn queries or even better - buy a book on SQL...
Personally: (being a newbie with an interest in developing a strong rdms
skillset) I've enjoyed
following
I would hope that your choice to use postgreSQL is because it is superior
technology that scales well financially... not because you get a warm fuzzy
from all your friends on the mailing lists...
Oisin Glynn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 10:30, Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
Personally: I think your posts are getting annoying. This isn't SQLCentral.
Learn to write your own damn queries or even better - buy a book on SQL...
Personally: (being a newbie with an interest in developing a strong rdms
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 08:30:54AM -0700, Richard Broersma Jr wrote:
However, if questions like these are *really* off-topic for the
pgsql-sql I would be interested in knowing what kind of threads are
acceptable and on-topic for this list.
They're not off-topic. The point of the list is
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 09:20:13AM -0700, codeWarrior wrote:
I would hope that your choice to use postgreSQL is because it is superior
technology that scales well financially... not because you get a warm fuzzy
from all your friends on the mailing lists...
I would hope that the tone of the
Don't forget that support is a very important part of making a decision about whether to or not to use a technology. Having people who are happy to read and respond to any question is part of great support for the product.
And I am glad to see that most people on this list agree with me on the
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 10:09:01AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael, my derivative of your query example works
great - thank you!
i think i understand everything except why multiplying
by 1.0 is necessary. when i take it out, my expected
result, 0.500..., turns into 0 - so i
hi all, i posted this problem on the novice thread,
but it makes much more sense to post it here, instead.
sorry fo rthe double posting, i'll be sure to post
advanced SQL questions here in the future.
i have the following two tables (trimmed down for
simplicity's sake):
t_inspect
id,
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 04:09:21PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what i can't seem to do is to get both - a count of
the total number of t_inspect_result.inspect_pass
where the value is true and a total count, by unique
t_inspect.id.
Are you looking for something like this?
SELECT 1.0 *
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 04:09:21PM -0700,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what i can't seem to do is to get both - a count
of
the total number of t_inspect_result.inspect_pass
where the value is true and a total count, by
unique
t_inspect.id.
Are you looking for something like this?
13 matches
Mail list logo
