Re: [sqlite] SQLl question

2009-05-15 Thread Evan Burkitt
On 05/15/2009 03:41, Dennis Cote wrote: > > Your database would be simpler if you simply combined these two tables > into a single table in the first place. It would eliminate the need to > combine them for this type of query. The tables already have a type > field to distinguish the email

Re: [sqlite] SQLl question

2009-05-15 Thread Patty Lindsay
Try select n.name, p.type, p.addr from p join name on p.id = n.id union select n.name, e.type, e.addr from e join name on e.id = n.id Patty On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:14 AM, Evan Burkitt wrote: > This isn't a Sqlite question per se, but I know there are some SQL gurus

Re: [sqlite] SQLl question

2009-05-14 Thread John Machin
On 15/05/2009 2:37 PM, Dennis Cote wrote: > Evan Burkitt wrote: >> This isn't a Sqlite question per se, but I know there are some SQL gurus >> here who might have some insight into this problem. I apologize for >> being off-topic; I can be shameless when I need help. :)> >> >> I have three

Re: [sqlite] SQLl question

2009-05-14 Thread Dennis Cote
Evan Burkitt wrote: > This isn't a Sqlite question per se, but I know there are some SQL gurus > here who might have some insight into this problem. I apologize for > being off-topic; I can be shameless when I need help. :)> > > I have three tables, N, P and E. N contains the fields id and name.

[sqlite] SQLl question

2009-05-14 Thread Evan Burkitt
This isn't a Sqlite question per se, but I know there are some SQL gurus here who might have some insight into this problem. I apologize for being off-topic; I can be shameless when I need help. :)> I have three tables, N, P and E. N contains the fields id and name. The other two each contain