From: | Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Rory Campbell-Lange <rory(at)campbell-lange(dot)net> |
Cc: | Postgres General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: using EXISTS instead of IN: how? |
Date: | 2003-07-22 16:39:09 |
Message-ID: | 3F1D68AD.1040103@mascari.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Rory Campbell-Lange wrote:
> I have been informed that at present (postgres 7.3.2) using IN is not
> advised, and I should replace it with EXISTS. I can't seem to get it to
> work.
...
>
> SELECT
> name
> FROM
> people
> WHERE
> exists (
> SELECT
> 1
> FROM
> states
> WHERE
> name ~* 'r'
> );
You should correlate the subquery with the outer query:
SELECT name
FROM people
WHERE EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM states
WHERE people.state = states.id AND
states.name ~* 'r'
);
But I don't see why you just don't use a join:
SELECT people.name
FROM people, states
WHERE people.state = states.id AND
states.name ~* 'r';
Hope that helps,
Mike Mascari
mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com
>
> However the second example simply finds all records in people.
>
> Thanks for any help,
> Rory
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Csaba Nagy | 2003-07-22 16:39:30 | Re: using EXISTS instead of IN: how? |
Previous Message | Lincoln Yeoh | 2003-07-22 16:38:53 | Re: A doubt w.r.t WAL |