[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ferindo Middleton Jr) writes:
> Is there a way to change the position attribute of a column in a
> table? I have data that I need to import into various tables in my db
> on a consistent basis... I usually us e the COPY ... FROM query but I
> can't control the -order- of the fiel
Ferindo,
> Is there a way to change the position attribute of a column
> in a table?
AFAIK, there's no way to change this easily. The best way to do it would
be as follows:
BEGIN WORK;
LOCK TABLE mytable IN ACCESS EXCLUSIVE MODE;
ALTER TABLE mytable ADD COLUMN col_to_move_2 coltype;
UPDATE myt
Is there a way to change the position attribute of a column in a table?
I have data that I need to import into various tables in my db on a
consistent basis... I usually us e the COPY ... FROM query but I can't
control the -order- of the fields my client dumps the data so I would
like to be abl
> Well, perhaps you will one day and a developer will hose your server
> with a "accidental" cross join and then you will understand.
Hehe :))
hey man, that's what testing and code review is all about
(dev teams still do that don't they?)
Accidental cartesians don't get to production ;)
Regar
Anthony Molinaro wrote:
> Daryl,
>
>
>>Whether you feel that is unnecessary or not, it *is* the ANSI Standard
>
>
>>and is thus, by definition, "how queries should be written."
>
>
> I disagree 100%. Oracle and db2 introduced window functions years
> before
> Ansi added them. Should we not have u
On Mon, 2005-09-26 at 20:03, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ferindo Middleton Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is there some reason why the SERIAL data type doesn't automatically have
> > a UNIQUE CONSTRAINT.
>
> It used to, and then we decoupled it. I don't think "I have no use for
> one without the other
Am 27.09.2005 um 17:02 schrieb Daryl Richter:
Ok, I guess, but isn't tit true now that you can insert a new address
row which doesn't belong to any valid network??
Yes, I can. But in the earlier approach, the fk pointed at a special
row in network ("UNKNOWN"), which maks no big difference.
I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 27.09.2005 um 16:02 schrieb Daryl Richter:
An attribute is redundant if it repeats a fact that can be learned
without it. If one table contains IP addresses and another contains
networks, then you can associate IP addresses and networks with a
join of the two
Am 27.09.2005 um 16:02 schrieb Daryl Richter:
> An attribute is redundant if it repeats a fact that can be learned
> without it. If one table contains IP addresses and another contains
> networks, then you can associate IP addresses and networks with a
> join of the two tables; indeed, this is h
Daryl,
> Whether you feel that is unnecessary or not, it *is* the ANSI Standard
> and is thus, by definition, "how queries should be written."
I disagree 100%. Oracle and db2 introduced window functions years
before
Ansi added them. Should we not have used them? It absurd to avoid using
a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Brandon Metcalf") writes:
> p == [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> p> Brandon Metcalf wrote:
> p> > Is there a way to check for the existence of a column in a table
> p> > other than, say, doing a SELECT on that column name and checking the
> p> > output?
>
> p> SELECT * FROM
Michael Fuhr wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 12:34:59PM +0200, Axel Rau wrote:
>
>>Am 26.09.2005 um 02:05 schrieb Michael Fuhr:
>>
>>>On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 09:19:25PM +0200, Axel Rau wrote:
>>>
I'm sure this would be the cleanest solution but remember networks
change.
>>>
>>>Yes, which
Anthony Molinaro wrote:
that query is 100% correct.
it's just an equijoin (a type of inner join) between 3 tables.
the syntax you show is how queries should be written and is more
representative of what a joins between relations really are:
Cartesian products with filters applied
the ansi
p == [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
p> Brandon Metcalf wrote:
p> > Is there a way to check for the existence of a column in a table
p> > other than, say, doing a SELECT on that column name and checking the
p> > output?
p> SELECT * FROM information_schema.columns;
p> Customize to taste.
Yes, t
14 matches
Mail list logo
