hi all,
SUMMARY:
i want to replace
AND t_inspect.inspect_pass = 'f'
with a complex query that yields the same result. the
complex query is in the form of...
SELECT DISTINCT ON (t_inspect.inspect_id)
t_inspect_result.inspect_result_pass,
t_inspect_result.inspect_result_id
FROM t_insp
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 10:09:01AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Michael, my derivative of your query example works
> great - thank you!
>
> i think i understand everything except why multiplying
> by 1.0 is necessary. when i take it out, my expected
> result, 0.500..., turns into 0 -
Only if you assume that ordering by unique_id and by date_sent are equivalent. That may be the case but I personally hate making assumptions like that. When someone goes into the database and updates records (clean up bad data, etc.) your perfectly running query can suddenly produce bad results.
Sorry to stick my nose in here...would not this work better?SELECT broadcast_id,date_sent,status from broadcast_history whereunique_id in (SELECT max(unique_id) from broadcast_history group by broadcast_id);Seems like a simpler option.
- Original Message -- From:Patrick Jacquot Sent:Friday
Collin Peters wrote:
I am having some serious mental block here. Here is the abstract
version of my problem. I have a table like this:
unique_id (PK) broadcast_id date_sent status
1 1 2005-04-0430
2 1
