Hi Sean, thank you for your answer.
Some questions before I can give a suggestion:
> TEST_ID JFI_ID F_NAME N1_NAME N2_NAME MODE CHARACTERIST
> IC PROPERTY
> 1 1 FLOW_1 NODE_A NODE_B MODE_1 HIGH FLOW > 10
litres /
> sec
> 1 1 FLOW_1 NODE_A NODE_B MODE_1 HIGH FLOW > 50 gals /
> hour
> 1 1 FLOW_1 NODE_A NODE_B MODE_1 LOW LOSS Pump
current <
> 30
> 2 2 FLOW_2 NODE_C NODE_D MODE_1 LOW FLOW < 5
litres / sec
> 44 3 FLOW_1 NODE_C NODE_D MODE_2 LOW FLOW < 5
litres / sec
> Q1. How can I group and LIST() to produce a single row for the first
test case
> (FLOW_1 from NODE_A to NODE_B with MODE_1). The result would look
> something like this:
> 1 1 FLOW_1 NODE_A NODE_B MODE_1 HIGH_FLOW, LOW_LOSS >
> 10 litres / sec, > 50 gals / hour, Pump current < 30
Q: Did you mean to exclude the 2nd "HIGH_FLOW" characteristic value
from the summary?
Yes, the same information should not be repeated within a single
'field'. The second "HIGH_FLOW" characteristic is only in the original
result set because it has 2 properties (> 10 litres / sec and > 50 gals
/ hour - sorry contrived I know!) via the J_CHAR_PROPERTY table.
Q: Do you require the relationship/relative position between the
"characteristic" and "property" values be maintained in the summary
result?
It would be nice, but not essential. Currently the 'properties' of a
'characteristic' are not ordered to keep the example simple, but I could
add a SEQ field to define the ordering and in that case it would be good
for the LIST() to observe the order.
Mike
