> In the sub-SELECT you use * so you get all columns. That's
> not necessary.
>
Ah, thanks!
> It might be better to rewrite as a self-join using LEFT
> OUTER JOIN on filename and filepath, using an NULL istarget
> from one or the other alias as an indication that target
> instance of the file is
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:08:13 +0100, Kees Nuyt
wrote:
> PRIMARY KEY (filepathid,filename,istarget)
Oops, make that
PRIMARY KEY (pathid,filename,istarget)
--
( Kees Nuyt
)
c[_]
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:53:18 +0100, Jonas Sandman
wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I have a database with about 137000 * 2 rows with four columns;
>fileid, filename, filepath and istarget.
>It's used to determine if two scanned directories are equal so I run a
>simply query to get the rows that are missing on t
Hello,
I have a database with about 137000 * 2 rows with four columns;
fileid, filename, filepath and istarget.
It's used to determine if two scanned directories are equal so I run a
simply query to get the rows that are missing on the target directory
but do exists in the source directory.
I use
It's not liking the "as" ... this works more or less..
select b.amountowed, b.apr, b.dueday, b.minimumdue, b.payee,
b.payeeid, b.iscc, b.isactive, p2.payeeid, p2.amount,
case p2.amount when '' then 0 else sum(amount) end as amount,
case p2.payments when null then 0 else 1 end as paid,
payments
fro
I have this SQL in Postgres and it works fine, I'm trying to port it
over to SQLite and having issues.. SQLite doesnt like left outer
joining to a subquery..
Can you guys think of a way around this?
select b.amountowed, b.apr, b.dueday, b.minimumdue, b.payee, p.note,
b.payeeid, case when p.amount
Hi folks!
I Have two tables, and i need access data from both. below it's my tables;
CREATE TABLE Product (
CD_PROD INTEGER
CONSTRAINT PK_PROD NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT,
CD_REMT_COMM INTEGER
CONSTRAINT FK_PROD_REMT_COMM REFERENCES
Remote_command(CD_REMT_COMM),
CD_IDEN_P
Samuel R. Neff wrote:
Still, I think backwards compatibility and consistency with other databases
would be most important in this situation. I just checked MSSQL and it's
same as current sqlite which uses the first select statement's column names.
Samuel,
The following is from Oracle's docu
2007 11:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Help with SQL syntax. Ticket #2296
On 4/12/07, Samuel R. Neff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Wouldn't implementation dependent mean it's not really standardized? The
> way I read it the query could still b
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Consider this query:
>
>SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY a,b;
>
> Is the query above equalent to:
>
> (1) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY 1,2;
>
> Or is it the same as:
>
> (2) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION S
On 4/12/07, Samuel R. Neff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Wouldn't implementation dependent mean it's not really standardized? The
way I read it the query could still be considered legal in some dbms and
not
in others (which stinks).
Samuel,
That's not what the standard says. It says the name
AIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Dennis Cote [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:05 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Help with SQL syntax. Ticket #2296
...
Otherwise, the of the i-th column of TR is implementation
dependent
and not equival
At 7:22 PM + 4/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider this query:
SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY a,b;
Is the query above equalent to:
(1) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY 1,2;
Or is it the same as:
(2) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider this query:
SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY a,b;
Is the query above equalent to:
(1) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY 1,2;
Or is it the same as:
(2) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER
ington D.C. metro area. If interested
contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Andrew Finkenstadt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Help with SQL syntax. Ticket #2296
My understanding is:
select a, b from
My understanding is:
select a, b from t1
union
select b, a from t1
is equivalent to
select a as a, b as b from t1
union
select b as a, a as b from t1
And therefore, the first sql statement controls the resulting column names,
and the order by applies to the column names (transitively) f
Consider this query:
SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY a,b;
Is the query above equalent to:
(1) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY 1,2;
Or is it the same as:
(2) SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT b, a FROM t1 ORDER BY 2,1;
I need to know th
, 2004 10:06 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [sqlite] Help with "SQL error: database is locked"
Hi, I am in the process of porting sqlite (version 2.8.13) to vxworks. I
am running into some problems.
It seems to work when I invoke the shell with no database (:memory:). I
can then cre
Hi, I am in the process of porting sqlite (version 2.8.13) to vxworks. I
am running into some problems.
It seems to work when I invoke the shell with no database (:memory:). I
can then create tables, insert records, etc. In general I can submit SQL
queries at will. However, when I invoke the shell
19 matches
Mail list logo
