On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:47:27 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (George Weaver)
wrote:
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stefan Berglund wrote:
foo WHERE (ID = 53016 OR ID = 27 OR ID = 292 OR ID = 512) or I could
alternatively pass the string of IDs ('53016,27,292,512') to a table
returning function which TABLE
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:46:33 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruno Wolff III)
wrote:
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:15:01 -0700,
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an app where the user makes multiple selections from a list. I
can either construct a huge WHERE
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 09:38:52 -0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jorge Godoy)
wrote:
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Show me a user which really clicks on 1000 or more checkboxes on a
webpage or similar ;)
I'd think around 20 values is plenty.
On the other hand, show
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 08:26:32 +0300 (MSK), oleg@sai.msu.su (Oleg
Bartunov) wrote:
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't know if you could change your schema. but I'd consider your
problem as a overlapping arrays task and use contrib/intarray for that.
That's a nice piece of work, Oleg, and extremely
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 10:26:48AM -0700, Stefan Berglund wrote:
that PostgreSQL would allow a substitutable parameter in the IN clause.
However, it seems that it can't be done in this fashion without using
dynamic SQL unless I'm missing something.
The substitutable list has to be an array,
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I tried this:
create or replace function foo(plist TEXT)
RETURNS SETOF Show_Entries as $$
SELECT *
FROM Show_Entries
WHERE Show_ID = 1250 AND Show_Number IN ($1);
$$ LANGUAGE sql;
When I use select * from foo('101,110,115,120'); I get
Bruno Wolff III schrieb:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:15:01 -0700,
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an app where the user makes multiple selections from a list. I
can either construct a huge WHERE clause such as SELECT blah blah FROM
foo WHERE (ID = 53016 OR ID = 27 OR ID = 292
Tino Wildenhain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Show me a user which really clicks on 1000 or more checkboxes on a
webpage or similar ;)
I'd think around 20 values is plenty.
On the other hand, show me a page with 1000 or more checkboxes to be clicked
at once and I'd show a developer / designer
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:41:21 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) wrote:
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:37:08 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) wrote:
It looks pretty ugly to me too, but you haven't explained your problem
clearly enough
Stefan Berglund wrote:
foo WHERE (ID = 53016 OR ID = 27 OR ID = 292 OR ID = 512) or I could
alternatively pass the string of IDs ('53016,27,292,512') to a table
returning function which TABLE is then JOINed with the table I wish to
Stefan,
The user selections will be in some sort of list.
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:15:01 -0700,
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have an app where the user makes multiple selections from a list. I
can either construct a huge WHERE clause such as SELECT blah blah FROM
foo WHERE (ID = 53016 OR ID = 27 OR ID = 292 OR ID = 512) or I could
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:37:08 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) wrote:
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Below is a small test case that illustrates what I'm attempting which is
to provide a comma separated list of numbers to a procedure which
subsequently uses
Hi-
Below is a small test case that illustrates what I'm attempting which is
to provide a comma separated list of numbers to a procedure which
subsequently uses this list in a join with another table.
My questions are is this a set based solution and is this the best
approach in terms of using
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 08:26:32 +0300 (MSK), oleg@sai.msu.su (Oleg
Bartunov) wrote:
in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I don't know if you could change your schema. but I'd consider your
problem as a overlapping arrays task and use contrib/intarray for that.
Oleg
I can very definitely change my schema at this
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 00:37:08 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom Lane) wrote:
It looks pretty ugly to me too, but you haven't explained your problem
clearly enough for anyone to be able to recommend a better solution path.
Why do you feel you need to do
Hi-
Below is a small test case that illustrates what I'm attempting which is
to provide a comma separated list of numbers to a procedure which
subsequently uses this list in a join with another table.
My questions are is this a set based solution and is this the best
approach in terms of using
I don't know if you could change your schema. but I'd consider your
problem as a overlapping arrays task and use contrib/intarray for that.
Oleg
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Stefan Berglund wrote:
Hi-
Below is a small test case that illustrates what I'm attempting which is
to provide a comma separated
Stefan Berglund [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Below is a small test case that illustrates what I'm attempting which is
to provide a comma separated list of numbers to a procedure which
subsequently uses this list in a join with another table.
My questions are is this a set based solution and is
18 matches
Mail list logo
