| From: | Alessio Bragadini <alessio(at)albourne(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sarah Officer <officers(at)aries(dot)tucson(dot)saic(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Bantos <anon(at)mgfairfax(dot)rr(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] How do you live without OUTER joins? |
| Date: | 2000-01-13 09:11:34 |
| Message-ID: | 387D96C6.2DD34505@albourne.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Sarah Officer wrote:
> How about using a union?
>
> select cc.com_cat_long, co.company_name
> from company_category cc, company co
> where cc.com_cat_abbr = co.com_cat_abbr
> union
> select 'unknown' as com_cat_long, company_name
> from company
> where com_cat_abbr is null;
Yes, would be the best way to go. Unfortunately I need one of this outer
joins in a VIEW, and seems to me that a VIEW cannot be created with a
UNION.
Therefore, for one of our projects we had to setup an intermediate table
kept consistent using a number of triggers. Having outer joins or UNION
in VIEWs would definitively be a much better way!
--
Alessio F. Bragadini alessio(at)albourne(dot)com
APL Financial Services http://www.sevenseas.org/~alessio
Nicosia, Cyprus phone: +357-2-750652
"It is more complicated than you think"
-- The Eighth Networking Truth from RFC 1925
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chana Slutzkin | 2000-01-13 11:03:55 | |
| Previous Message | Gabriel Fernandez | 2000-01-13 09:03:52 | Confussion with table-lock levels and isolation levels |