OK, so I made an assumption. I thought the performanceType was mandatory, so I didn't get the outer join suggestion. Now after talking to Dave A, I get it. It wasn't mandatory, so the inner join excluded it when it didn't exist. If I had an outer, it would have appeared, but it would have gone wherever nulls would go (as opposed to where I wanted it).
If I had gotten the array, then in code applied the sort order to it, I'd have gotten the same result (without changing the type of join). However, as I want this to be mandatory, I should change that, then it should work. (I'll know when I get home) On Dec 1, 2010, at 10:10 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: > > On Dec 1, 2010, at 6:56 PM, Andrew R. Kinnie wrote: > >> OK, well I did that, and even re-booted the machine. No change. >> >> In other news if I eliminate my second sort ordering, the previously missing >> booking appears. > > That sounds like maybe you have a inner join where you want an outer join. > > >> I changed it to use ERXSortOrdering and get the same result. >> >> I need a beer. > > Under these circumstances I'd suggest Brennivín and lots of it. I'll leave > the inclusion of fermented shark to your own discretion. > > > Chuck > _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
