Maybe something like this would work for you:
SELECT *
FROM table
WHERE data1 IN (SELECT data1
FROM table
GROUP BY data1
HAVING count(*)>=3);
~snowbiwan
--
View this message in context:
http://sqlite.1065341.n5.nabble.com/help-with-query-t
A correlated subquery:
select *
from t
where (select count(*)
from t as b
where b.data1 = t.data1) >= 3;
or with a subselected set of valid rows:
select *
from t
where data1 in (select data1
from t as b
group by data1
h
Hello,
thanks a lot. Works like a charm!
I should really do more sql.
Thanks,
Hajo
Am 13.01.2015 um 09:03 schrieb Hick Gunter:
Step 1: count the occurrences:
SELECT data1,count() AS count FROM table GROUP BY data1;
Step 2: get the rows with a count above the limit
SELECT data1,count() AS
Step 1: count the occurrences:
SELECT data1,count() AS count FROM table GROUP BY data1;
Step 2: get the rows with a count above the limit
SELECT data1,count() AS count FROM table GROUP BY data1 HAVING count >= 3;
Step 3: get the keys from the rows
SELECT data1 FROM (SELECT data1,count() AS cou
>From: Drake Wilson Sun, November 14, 2010 7:50:19 AM
>> SELECT COUNT(Offset_Y) FROM (SELECT DISTINCT Offset_Y FROM Tiles WHERE
>>PatternID
>>
>> = 1);
>>
>> Is it possible to have a single query that will generate a row for each
>> PattenID, COUNT(Offset_Y) combination?
>
>Does SELECT Pattern
Quoth Jeff Archer , on 2010-11-13 11:20:51
-0800:
> And I can get the number of unique Y offsets in a pattern like so:
>
> SELECT COUNT(Offset_Y) FROM (SELECT DISTINCT Offset_Y FROM Tiles WHERE
> PatternID
> = 1);
>
> Is it possible to have a single query that will generate a row for each
> P
On 4/8/08, Neville Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Igor and Puneet,
> These are very different solutions, or so it appears to me.
>
> Any idea whether the join or the sub-select would be faster? In my
> example there is an index on tagid.
Just as in any language, SQL also gives many
Thanks Igor and Puneet,
These are very different solutions, or so it appears to me.
Any idea whether the join or the sub-select would be faster? In my
example there is an index on tagid.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008, 8:12:53 AM, you wrote:
IT> Neville Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I have a
Neville Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a table that holds 1 to many items. To keep it simple say it
> has 2 columns: tagid and noteid. A given tagid can have many noteid's.
> ex.
> tagid noteid
> -- --
> a 1
> a 4
> a 7
> b 7
> b 3
> c 1
>
On 4/8/08, Neville Franks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a table that holds 1 to many items. To keep it simple say it
> has 2 columns: tagid and noteid. A given tagid can have many noteid's.
> ex.
> tagid noteid
> -- --
> a 1
> a 4
> a 7
> b 7
> b
Fred,
A query I can understand!
This was my attempt, and worked to some degree, but yours is more workable
and, I feel, more accurate
"select
NewsData.Postcode,NewsData.Address1,Agents.Code,Agents.Shopname,Agents.Addre
ss1.Agents.Price from NewsData join Agents on NewsData.Postcode where
NewsDat
Without testing on my side... how's that?
select a.Shop1, a.Shop2, a.Postcode, b.Code, b.Shopname, b.Address1, b.Price
from NewsData a, Agents b
where (a.Shop1 > '' or a.Shop2 > '') and b.Shopname > '' and (a.Shop1
= b.Shopname or a.Shop2 = b.Shopname)
order by a.Postcode asc
On Fri, 8 Oct 2004
12 matches
Mail list logo
