From: | "Oliver Heinz" <oheinz(at)stud(dot)fbi(dot)fh-darmstadt(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Problem using Subselect results |
Date: | 2003-07-29 15:14:12 |
Message-ID: | 000401c355e4$11b0cdd0$0f02a8c0@spineofgod |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
I'll try this tomorrow - combining DISTINCT ON (two.two_id) and sorting by
two.updatenr could (should) have the desired effect - I never thought about
using ORDER and DISTINCT that way.
I'll report my success or failure...
Thanks so far!
Bye,
Oliver
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: <oheinz(at)stud(dot)fbi(dot)fh-darmstadt(dot)de>
Cc: <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 5:00 PM
Subject: Re: [SQL] Problem using Subselect results
> oheinz(at)stud(dot)fbi(dot)fh-darmstadt(dot)de writes:
> > But as this data is time sensitive, we introduce some kind of time
stamp - a
> > serial which is global to all tables. Now, for each record in table
'one' i
> > want to see only the corresponding records in tables two, three, etc...
that
> > were created before 'one.updatenr'
>
> > SELECT * FROM one, two WHERE (one.two_id=two.two_id AND one.updatenr >
> > two.updatenr);
>
> > This might match multiple records in tables two (two_id is not a pk, we
have
> > historic records in this table). Now I want only the most current
version
> > before one.updatenr. - And that's where I run into trouble.
>
> You might be able to make this work by using SELECT DISTINCT ON. See
> the "weather reports" example in the SELECT reference page.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Antony Gubert | 2003-07-29 15:14:19 | Unsubscribe |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-07-29 15:00:56 | Re: Problem using Subselect results |