Hi thoen, Well.. i tried to use your query...
select distinct courses.* from courses inner join course_times monday_courses on courses.id = monday_courses.course_id and monday_courses.time_id = 1 left outer join course_times non_monday_courses on courses.id = non_monday_courses.course_id and non_monday_courses.time_id <> 1 where non_monday_courses.id is null but, actually, in my database, at times table, i have another attribute like the hour of the course.... and so, i cant ask non_monday_courses.time_id <> 1, because actually i dont know if what i want to search is the register of id =1 of my courses_times table, i only know things about times... i have to make a join in the times table and ask times.day <> 'Seg', could you understand? i wasn't so clear... how could i make your query but using times.day <> 'Seg' instead of non_monday_courses <> 1 ??? Thanks Fernando 2011/1/6 Marnen Laibow-Koser <[email protected]> > [email protected] wrote in post #972869: > > On Jan 5, 12:10pm, Marnen Laibow-Koser <[email protected]> wrote: > >> syntax, without proprietary extensions. This gives the best portability > >> across databases. > > > > Just tacking on another suggestion to this if people are reading back > > through here: if you do need literal SQL its a good idea to put it in > > a configuration file with a lookup key > > (i.e. :count_all_my_angry_birds); > > Why not just use a named scope (or the Rails 3 equivalent)? That's what > I tend to do for complex queries. Granted, you don't get all the SQL in > one file, but that's a *good* thing: it means you're looking at the SQL > in context. > > I want to like your config file idea, but I think it's just reinventing > stored procedures in a way that removes their remaining advantages. > > > that way if you switch db engines or > > support multiple ones all your specific SQL is in one location that > > you can ensure works for whatever different dbs you need to support. > > And of course keep that file as ANSI compliant so that there are as > > little changes required as possible. > > ...in which case your proposed solution isn't necessary anyway. :) > > > > > \Peter > > Best, > -- > Marnen Laibow-Koser > http://www.marnen.org > [email protected] > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<rubyonrails-talk%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
