Vargas <hiv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> can see:
>
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4928054/postgresql-wildcard-like-for-any-of-a-list-of-words
>
> 2017-09-04 22:42 GMT-05:00 Ryan Murphy <ryanfmur...@gmail.com>:
>
>> > I'm pretty s
> I'm pretty sure it doesn't work syntactically. Don't recall the details
offhand.
Ok, thanks!
>
> I'm not sure why we've never got round to providing such a thing
> in core ... probably lack of consensus on what to name the reverse
> operator. You'd need to support regex cases as well, so there's
> more than one operator name to come up with.
>
Interesting! It seems like one "simple"
e.g. I know you can do
select * from post
where 'music' = any(tags);
Which is similar to saying tags @> '{music}'.
And I see that I can even do:
select * from post
where 'music' LIKE any(tags);
...implying that ANY is more general in some ways than @>,
e.g. it can would with LIKE as well as
> Because I specifically aliased the first task reference using AS task_1.
>
>
Ok, totally. I missed that when I first read your query, didn't read it
closely enough. Thanks.
> You're confused about the input vs. the output. The output columns
> of a view all have to have distinct names, just like you can't do
> "create table foo (f1 int, f1 int)". They can be reading the same
> values, though.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Ok, that makes sense.
> You're confused about the input vs. the output. The output columns
> of a view all have to have distinct names, just like you can't do
> "create table foo (f1 int, f1 int)". They can be reading the same
> values, though.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Ok, that makes sense.
Interesting, thanks! Do you know why the first one fails instead of doing
that renaming process, while your version succeeds?
On Monday, September 5, 2016, Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com>
wrote:
> On 09/05/2016 12:55 PM, Ryan Murphy wrote:
>
>> Hello, I have a qu
Hello, I have a question about views in Postgres.
Given a table like so:
create table todo (
id serial,
task text,
done_time timestamp default null
);
it is legal (though perhaps not advised, by some) to query it like so:
select task, * from todo;
This gives a result with 2 redundant
