From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jodi Kanter <jkanter(at)virginia(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Postgres SQL List <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: join syntax |
Date: | 2003-06-17 18:53:48 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0306171253220.2647-100000@css120.ihs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Tue, 17 Jun 2003, Jodi Kanter wrote:
> One of my colleagues has created a database where he has the same field
> name in two tables and uses this field to link his tables rather than
> some arbitrary value. For example, he has used "exp_id" in two tables.
> When writing his joins he uses a syntax that says something like JOIN ON
> EXP_ID. Can someone tell me what that syntax should be? I am not very
> familiar with it since I typically use the syntax where one field is set
> equal to the other.
> Personally I prefer not to set databases up this way but cannot seem to
> convince him of this. And yet I am supposed to now help him with his
> database and application.. Is there some documentation that would define
> this type of syntax? How is this handled if you have more than one table
> in the join? It does not appear that this format would allow for this.
If you're joining two tables on a field that has the same name you can use
a natural join.
select * from table1 natural join table2;
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Radu-Adrian Popescu | 2003-06-17 18:58:12 | Re: Catching DML exceptions in PL/pgSQL |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2003-06-17 18:49:44 | Re: disabling triggers |