On Mar 25, Neo Anderson wrote:
Do not be confused by the sample SQL statement. What I really wanted to do is
return two different resultsets in one statement and wanted an API to handle
the two resultsets. For example:
select * form table1;
select * from table2;
And I do not want to use big union.
By reading other replies I think it's actually not practical to do this.
...
> From: itandetnik at mvps.org
...
> Why do you want two resultsets? What is the actual problem you are trying to
solve?
I think it would be good to answer Igor's question. You have only
shared the low-level "solutions" you thought might work and now think
impractical.
It would help those who might help to understand what use of a union
fails to accomplish that your separate queries would accomplish. I'm
having a hard time imagining it, and my guesses are so arcane that it
seems silly to engage in such when you have already know.
To break it down a bit: What will you do with these two result sets?
How does combining the queries, one after the other, yield something
usefully different from a union? Why not prepare one query after
another, or at least execute one then the other?
At this point, I doubt anybody can help without better information as to
what the objective is.
--
Larry Brasfield
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
