I didn't run it yet, the idea of using min(col1) = max(col1) was all I needed. I assumed it was incorrect because I thought referring to an ungrouped column in a group by was incorrect, because the ungrouped col would represent a set, and not a value...
I just ran this: select c2 from (select 1 as c1, 1 as c2 union select 1 as c1, 2 as c2 union select 1 as c1, 3 as c2) group by c1 and it returns 3. I think this is incorrect behaviour and should not compile because the result of c2 is clearly {1, 2, 3}...or am I wrong about this? Is this standard SQL languages behaviour? Igor Tandetnik wrote: > > "johnny depp (really!)" > <nick_reyntj...@hotmail.com> wrote in > message news:22057169.p...@talk.nabble.com >> You probably meant: >> >> select col1, case when min(col2) = max(col2) then min(col2) else 'not >> the same' end >> from mytable group by col1; > > It works for me as originally written. Do you get any errors? > > Igor Tandetnik > > > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Little-SQL-help-please..-tp22052925p22063324.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users