On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>
> Yes, the max(y) operation is flattened out of the query probably because
> it is not referenced anywhere and the optimizer does not see that it is
> performing any useful function. There is still only one row
On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:43:00 -0400
Richard Hipp wrote:
> There were often restrictions on the permitted values for block
> sizes. And you couldn't ask the operating system to tell you whether
> a file was text or binary or sequential or random-access or what its
> block-size
"Richard Hipp" wrote...
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Simon Slavin
wrote:
On 14 Sep 2014, at 8:58pm, jose isaias cabrera
wrote:
> Yeah, that is what I am using now. I was trying to get the speed that
supposedly is in the IN clause. :-)
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
>
> On 14 Sep 2014, at 8:58pm, jose isaias cabrera
> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, that is what I am using now. I was trying to get the speed that
> supposedly is in the IN clause. :-) Thanks.
>
> BETWEEN
On 14 Sep 2014, at 8:58pm, jose isaias cabrera wrote:
> "Darren Duncan" wrote...
>>
>>
>> BETWEEN '2014-01-01' AND '2014-01-05'
>
> Yeah, that is what I am using now. I was trying to get the speed that
> supposedly is in the IN clause. :-) Thanks.
BETWEEN is
"Martin Engelschalk" wrote...
Hi Jose,
you are probably looking for the between-Operator: Open
http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html and search for "The BETWEEN operator"
inn you case, date BETWEEN '2014-01-01' AND '2014-01-05'
Martin
Thanks, Martin. Yes, that is what I am using now...
"Simon Slavin" wrote...
On 14 Sep 2014, at 11:59am, Martin Engelschalk
wrote:
you are probably looking for the between-Operator: Open
http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html and search for "The BETWEEN
operator"
inn you case, date BETWEEN '2014-01-01' AND
"Darren Duncan" wrote...
On 2014-09-13, 10:07 PM, jose isaias cabrera wrote:
I know that the IN clause contains a list of something. I.e.
IN ('2014-01-01', '2014-01-02', '2014-01-03', '2014-01-04', '2014-01-05')
So the question is, is there a shorter way for one to say something like,
IN
Yes, the max(y) operation is flattened out of the query probably because it is
not referenced anywhere and the optimizer does not see that it is performing
any useful function. There is still only one row returned, however, because
the same accumulator is used to collect the result, it just
jose isaias cabrera wrote:
> I know that the IN clause contains a list of something. I.e.
>
> IN ('2014-01-01', '2014-01-02', '2014-01-03', '2014-01-04', '2014-01-05')
>
> So the question is, is there a shorter way for one to say something like,
>
> IN ('2014-01-01', ..., '2014-01-05')
>
> where
On 9/14/14, Lea Verou wrote:
> Per the 3.7.11 changelog [1], queries of the form SELECT max(x), y FROM
> table return the value of y from the same row that contains the maximum x
> value. However, this:
Hello! I don't think this is a bug. The documentation for the SELECT
On 14 Sep 2014, at 11:59am, Martin Engelschalk
wrote:
> you are probably looking for the between-Operator: Open
> http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html and search for "The BETWEEN operator"
>
> inn you case, date BETWEEN '2014-01-01' AND '2014-01-05'
By the way,
On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 00:18:34 -0400, Lea Verou
wrote:
> Per the 3.7.11 changelog [1], queries of the form
> SELECT max(x), y FROM table return the value of y
> from the same row that contains the maximum x value.
> However, this:
> select y from (SELECT max(x), y FROM table);
>
Hi Jose,
you are probably looking for the between-Operator: Open
http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html and search for "The BETWEEN operator"
inn you case, date BETWEEN '2014-01-01' AND '2014-01-05'
Martin
Am 14.09.2014 07:07, schrieb jose isaias cabrera:
Greetings!
I know that the IN
Per the 3.7.11 changelog [1], queries of the form SELECT max(x), y FROM table
return the value of y from the same row that contains the maximum x value.
However, this:
select y from (SELECT max(x), y FROM table);
would not return the same y rows. This would work as expected:
select m, y from
On 2014-09-13, 10:07 PM, jose isaias cabrera wrote:
I know that the IN clause contains a list of something. I.e.
IN ('2014-01-01', '2014-01-02', '2014-01-03', '2014-01-04', '2014-01-05')
So the question is, is there a shorter way for one to say something like,
IN ('2014-01-01', ...,
16 matches
Mail list logo