[Igor Tandetnik] > Steinar Midtskogen <stei...@latinitas.org> wrote: >> >> Thanks, I didn't think in that simple terms. :) I think about listing >> all the values, so I got lost.
I lost a word there: "I didn't think about listing"... >> >> But what if the tables share a timestamp, then I would get, say: >> >> 1328873300|1|2| | | | >> 1328873300| | |3| | | >> 1328873300| | | |4|5|6 >> >> How can that get collapsed into: >> >> 1328873300|1|2|3|4|5|6 > > Try something like this: > > select timestamp, value1, ..., value6 from > (select timestamp from tab1 > union > select timestamp from tab2 > union > select timestamp from tab3) > left join tab1 using (timespamp) > left join tab2 using (timespamp) > left join tab3 using (timespamp); Wonderful! It also eliminates the need to list all the nulls and values, and as a bonus it gets ordered by timestamp whereas the previous solution required an "ORDER BY timestamp" which made everything slower than this solution (for some reason). -- Steinar _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
