Hi guys,
I have two tables T1, T2 - identical in fields [Index1 (INT), Index2(INT),
Count(INT), Value(INT)]
I would like to merge the content of T1 into T2 using the following ruels:
1. Copy into T2 data from T1 where Index1 AND Index2 (like two keys, PK and
SK) do not exist in T2
2. In case
Hi guys,
I have two tables T1, T2 - identical in fields [Index1 (INT), Index2(INT),
Count(INT), Value(INT)]
I would like to merge the content of T1 into T2 using the following ruels:
1. Copy into T2 data from T1 where Index1 AND Index2 (like two keys, PK and
SK) do not exist in T2
2. In case
On 23 November 2011 11:23, nadavius nadav...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi guys,
I have two tables T1, T2 - identical in fields [Index1 (INT), Index2(INT),
Count(INT), Value(INT)]
I would like to merge the content of T1 into T2 using the following ruels:
1. Copy into T2 data from T1 where Index1 AND
nadavius nadav...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have two tables T1, T2 - identical in fields [Index1 (INT), Index2(INT),
Count(INT), Value(INT)]
I would like to merge the content of T1 into T2 using the following ruels:
1. Copy into T2 data from T1 where Index1 AND Index2 (like two keys, PK and
SK) do
update a set location='new york ' where a.location isnull and a.mz_tik
in(select mz_tik from c);
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/updating-table-only-if-key-match-in-other-table-tp32873978p32873978.html
Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Gaurav Vyas gav...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no optimization as of now. I am just slitting the code into
various independent parts. And one more thing I found, I have installed
SQLite3 3.7.9 and when I am using sqlite3_open_v2 it gives error that says
undefined
SQLite version 3.7.9 2011-11-01 00:52:41
Enter .help for instructions
Enter SQL statements terminated with a ;
sqlite create table t(a);
sqlite select avg(a) from t order by avg(a); -- order by aggregate
possible
sqlite select 1 from t order by a; -- order by column not in result
possible
sqlite
On 23 Nov 2011, at 4:17pm, Wiktor Adamski wrote:
sqlite select 1 from t order by avg(a); -- should be possible
Why should this be possible ? For an 'ORDER BY' you need a value for each row.
But aggregate functions produce only one value for the whole SELECT command.
Simon.
On Nov 23, 2011, at 5:17 PM, Wiktor Adamski wrote:
sqlite select 1 from t order by avg(a); -- should be possible
Error: misuse of aggregate: avg();
As it says on the tin: nonsensical.
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 23 Nov 2011, at 4:17pm, Wiktor Adamski wrote:
sqlite select 1 from t order by avg(a); -- should be possible
Why should this be possible ? For an 'ORDER BY' you need a value for each
row. But aggregate functions
And FWIW, this query works as expected on MS SQL
Works on Firebird and produces one record with value 1.
RBS
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Pavel Ivanov paiva...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 23 Nov 2011, at 4:17pm, Wiktor
On Nov 23, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
But although it's completely senseless
just syntactically it looks correct - should produce just one row and
thus ORDER BY will be a no-op.
Well, if this is about Alice in Wonderland, then, what about:
select max( 1 ) from t order by avg( a
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Petite Abeille
petite.abei...@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 23, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
But although it's completely senseless
just syntactically it looks correct - should produce just one row and
thus ORDER BY will be a no-op.
Well, if this is
On Nov 23, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
Well, if this is about Alice in Wonderland, then, what about:
select max( 1 ) from t order by avg( a );
1
Well, apparently you did this on non-empty table. This query gives
different and kind of unexpected result on empty table. ;)
Well,
On Nov 23, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
This query gives
different and kind of unexpected result on empty table. ;)
Ooops... I see what you mean... on an empty table... this returns one row with
a null value:
sqlite select max( 1 ) from t;
That would qualify as a bug I guess :))
On 11/23/2011 11:17 AM, Wiktor Adamski wrote:
SQLite version 3.7.9 2011-11-01 00:52:41
Enter .help for instructions
Enter SQL statements terminated with a ;
sqlite create table t(a);
sqlite select avg(a) from t order by avg(a); -- order by aggregate
possible
sqlite select 1 from t order by
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Petite Abeille
petite.abei...@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 23, 2011, at 6:05 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
This query gives
different and kind of unexpected result on empty table. ;)
Ooops... I see what you mean... on an empty table... this returns one row
with a
On Nov 23, 2011, at 6:28 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
No, it's not a bug. It's SQL standard that such form of aggregate
query always returns one row. And when there's no rows in the table it
should return NULL (for all aggregate functions except count() which
returns 0). I said it's kind of
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 08:17:17AM -0800, Wiktor Adamski scratched on the wall:
SQLite version 3.7.9 2011-11-01 00:52:41
Enter .help for instructions
Enter SQL statements terminated with a ;
sqlite create table t(a);
sqlite select avg(a) from t order by avg(a);
-- order by aggregate
In the first query, there is an aggregate in the result set, so an
implicit GROUP BY is used. The ORDER BY is meaningless, but not an
error (and could be more easily written ORDER BY 1; see below).
The order is not meaningless. It can return an error or do nothing. If
aggregate in order
We have Process A which writes constantly to our SQLite database and we
have Process B which occasionally reads from this same database. When
Process B opens the database for read-only access and performs a select
statement on the database it causes Process A to get SQLITE_BUSY errors
when
Apparently, using such a function in ORDER BY
clause alone doesn't make the statement aggregate (whether it should is
perhaps debatable)
I suppose this may be in the standart. I'm 100% sure that this one is
allowed by standart:
... ORDER BY avg(a) OVER()
so likely ORDER BY avg(a) is also
You need WAL mode
http://www.sqlite.org/draft/wal.html
Michael D. Black
Senior Scientist
Advanced Analytics Directorate
Advanced GEOINT Solutions Operating Unit
Northrop Grumman Information Systems
From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org
On 22 Nov 2011, at 3:07pm, David Levinson wrote:
So my basic question is why is Process B locking the database when it is
opening the file for read-only access and not performing any writes on
the database being written to by Process A.
Is it possible that a select statement can lock
On 11/23/2011 1:29 PM, Wiktor Adamski wrote:
Apparently, using such a function in ORDER BY
clause alone doesn't make the statement aggregate (whether it should is
perhaps debatable)
I suppose this may be in the standart.
If I recall correctly, the standard doesn't allow ORDER BY to reference
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Wiktor Adamski
bardzotajneko...@interia.pl wrote:
Apparently, using such a function in ORDER BY
clause alone doesn't make the statement aggregate (whether it should is
perhaps debatable)
I suppose this may be in the standart. I'm 100% sure that this one is
On Nov 23, 2011, at 7:58 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
I believe OVER() is an Oracle-specific extension to SQL, not a
standard in any way.
Well, over( partition by... order by ... ) is part of the analytical syntax of
Oracle... nothing to do with ordering a result set...
Function(arg1,..., argn)
I believe OVER() is an Oracle-specific extension to SQL, not a
standard in any way.
ISO/IEC 9075-2:2003:
window function ::= window function type OVER window name or
specification
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
On Nov 23, 2011, at 8:50 PM, Wiktor Adamski wrote:
ISO/IEC 9075-2:2003:
window function ::= window function type OVER window name or
specification
This is related to so-called analytics in Oracle parlance. Not quite related to
the topic at hand.
A base of code that implements about every embedded function for sqlite3,
source code on my blog. It is a triple machine, looks at the world as
ripples for ontology. I tries to follow SQLITE standards. The control
program pops triple off of the configure table and executes them,
installing more
Docs would help people understand what you're up to...
Nico
--
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
I am trying to get a chunk of rows from a table which has 16 million rows.
The table is indexed. I am passing the query as SELECT * FROM persons
WHERE hid = 5; and it takes a few minutes to get me the results. Can
anyone suggest how to make it faster?
Gaurav
On 24 Nov 2011, at 7:45am, Gaurav Vyas wrote:
I am trying to get a chunk of rows from a table which has 16 million rows.
The table is indexed. I am passing the query as SELECT * FROM persons
WHERE hid = 5; and it takes a few minutes to get me the results. Can
anyone suggest how to make it
I am using multi threads but using single thread to test the speed. And
when I do typeof(hid), it gives real.
Table is indexed on that column. I dont have a primary key, will that make
any difference?
Gaurav
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 24 Nov
On Nov 24, 2011, at 8:48 AM, Simon Slavin wrote:
Is the table indexed on that column ?
And if it is... what's its selectivity?
What 's the query plan?
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
I used the following syntax to create index
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX persons_1x
ON persons (pid,hid);
Gaurav
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:54 AM, Petite Abeille petite.abei...@gmail.comwrote:
On Nov 24, 2011, at 8:48 AM, Simon Slavin wrote:
Is the table indexed on that column ?
And if it is...
36 matches
Mail list logo
