Thanks muchly for the excellent tip. Lots of useful references there.
I seem to have battled through this thicket -- onwards !
Greg
-Original Message-
From: Richard Huxton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 12:09 AM
To: Gregory S. Williamson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subjec
Chester Kustarz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I expected "MOVE FORWARD 0 FROM foo;" to always return
> 0, but I have found this not to be the case.
You are misinterpreting the output. The result is the number of rows
that would have been returned by a FETCH with the same parameters.
FETCH 0 means
I expected "MOVE FORWARD 0 FROM foo;" to always return
0, but I have found this not to be the case. Could
anybody comment whether this is expected:
mow=# begin;
BEGIN
mow=# create table a (a integer);
CREATE TABLE
mow=# insert into a values ( 1 );
INSERT 1823482 1
mow=# insert into a values ( 1 );
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 20:02:32 +,
beyaNet Consultancy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to create a query which basically goes along the lines of:
>
> INSERT INTO tableX ( COL1, COL2 ) VALUES ( x, y ) where COL1 !=x and
> COL2 !=Y
>
> So, insert a record into tableX where th
Hi,
I am trying to create a query which basically goes along the lines of:
INSERT INTO tableX ( COL1, COL2 ) VALUES ( x, y ) where COL1 !=x and COL2 !=Y
So, insert a record into tableX where there is not already an existence of COL1 and COL2
Can this be done as I have described or is there a mor
Yes java is compiled, and compilers do catch most syntax and scope
errors, as I said,
but the java object code is still interpreted. Logical errors and other
mistakes still get
through compilation, and good regression testing is still required for
quality assurance.
I think JSP is an excelent s
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Erik Thiele wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:17:31 -0600
> Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 15:19:13 +0100,
> > Erik Thiele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > now sadly i am getting this kind of problem:
> > >
> > >
> > > zeit=> insert in
On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 15:19:13 +0100,
Erik Thiele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> now sadly i am getting this kind of problem:
>
>
> zeit=> insert into a select
> nextval('delmeseq'),personalnumber,datum,datum from calendar where
> type=10409;
> INSERT 0 581 <-- see, 581 inserts which is prett
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:17:31 -0600
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 15:19:13 +0100,
> Erik Thiele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > now sadly i am getting this kind of problem:
> >
> >
> > zeit=> insert into a select
> > nextval('delmeseq'),personalnumber,datum
"David Witham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So I see that there is the extra sort above the sub-query that
> wouldn't be there using 7.4. Are you saying that the sort by survey
> after the sort by survey,question would potentially reorder the
> records initially sorted by survey,question?
Exactly
El Lun 22 Mar 2004 12:56, Dana Hudes escribió:
> If you have the option to handle the date manipulation in Perl
> use the DateTime modules. Also see Date::Calc.
NO!
Actualy what I'm doing is getting out of that (I'm using PHP's PEAR
Date::Calc) by creating some nice SQL and PL/PgSQL functions in
On Tuesday 23 March 2004 02:16, Gregory S. Williamson wrote:
> I am having an impossible time porting some simple Stored Procedures from
> Informix to postgres. The documentation is almost self defeating.
>
> Are there any better descriptions of how to define functions that return
> several tuples
12 matches
Mail list logo
