On Wednesday 06 June 2007 19:03:44 Eric Ongerth wrote: > On Jun 6, 8:47 am, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > your "size" column differs in type. you cant create a UNION with > > differing types in the unioned queries. so it can either be both > > string, both numeric, or use distinct columns. > > Ah! Ok, if i was more experienced with unions/joins I would have > realized that the way I was doing it, i was asking sa to smash two > 'size' columns of different type together. So I can just ask sa to > do some column aliasing if I really need the column on each child > table to be identically named simply "size", or if I don't mind the > change I can switch to having skis have a 'ski_size' column and > skiboots have a 'skiboot_size' column, etc. Correct? either this, or u could somehow str() (in SQL!) the numeric column for the purposes of union'ing, but i guess it would be too entangled/messy this way.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sqlalchemy" group. To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
