| From: | "James Orr" <james(at)lrgmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Jeff Eckermann" <jeff_eckermann(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "Aasmund Midttun Godal" <postgresql(at)envisity(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <jeremy(at)wundt(dot)psychiatry(dot)uiowa(dot)edu>, <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: transposing data for a view |
| Date: | 2001-11-01 16:54:19 |
| Message-ID: | 007f01c162f5$d9a58ee0$1600000a@lrg.office |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-sql |
> > BTW, I don't believe the self-join approach proposed
> > earlier will work, because joining on "scanid" will
> > create a cartesian type join where the region values
> > will be duplicated (multiplicated!).
>
> Not if you're talking about my query, they won't. I use that query form
> in many projects to create roll-ups; it's the "best" SQL92 approach to
> the "pivot table" problem. However, it will not work in 7.0.3.
I think he might be talking about mine. The region values will not be
duplicated, the WHERE clause prevents it.
I kind of prefer my own query aesthetically, is it as efficient internally?
- James
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | James Orr | 2001-11-01 17:16:38 | Aggregate binary AND |
| Previous Message | Edward Grabczewski | 2001-11-01 16:48:29 | PL/pgSQL syntax for strings |