| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3
Comments:
<0> <1> i modified the code to this , http://sql-servers.com/nopaste/?show=146. It runs but with same results
<1> you cannot join with products_ordered
<1> that will multiply the results like you found out
<0> i understand , but there must be a way to do this. I mean is it impossible
<1> ok, you know what, since you seem to ignore my advice I'm going to follow on that trend
<1> good luck
<0> ok thanks. Atleast i know it cant be done.
<1> it can be done
<1> I already told you the solution
<1> but never mind, you go on doing it your own way
<0> i tried that , u know i did
<0> <1> i modified the code to this , http://sql-servers.com/nopaste/?show=146. It runs but with same results
<1> remove products_ordered from the join
<0> k , but how do i include product_id. As thats the only place for it . In product ordered
<1> and why do you need to include product_id?
<0> stored procedure could be run for that particualr product
<1> and as I said, use the WHERE parent_auto_id IN ...
<1> to get that
<0> i tried that
<0> <1> i modified the code to this , http://sql-servers.com/nopaste/?show=146. It runs but with same results
<0> check it
<1> the trick is to do both things
<1> 1. use WHERE ... IN
<1> 2. Remove products_ordered from the join
<0> but again if u look at the diagram and the stored procedure i cant remove join from the stored procedure. Unless i am understanding u wrong
<1> well, let me just say this the last time
<0> in which case u can modify the query and paste
<1> you ... need ... to ... remove ... products_ordered ... from ... the ... join
<1> is that slow enough for you?
<1> because if it isn't I can type slower you know
<0> Its ok. I realise i am asking the wrong person . Thnaks for the help and time.
<1> ok, try this
<1> just remove products_ordered from the join, remove the INNER JOIN syntax
<1> just remove it, you don't need it as you're not referring to any of the fields in that table
<0> i know it works i have spent weeks on that problem , u thin i havent tried that
<0> what u r saying not joining
<1> what happens if you remove lines 14-17 in that query?
<0> but that way i cannot include produt_id in the table
<0> it gives me right results
<1> line 18 should be: WHERE O. <-- remove PO and just write O
<0> but i cant p*** in product_id, and later i have to modify the query to even include category_table
<0> k trying
<1> and remove BP. from line 19
<0> k
<0> http://sql-servers.com/nopaste/?show=147
<0> did u want me top take the join away as well
<0> to
<1> remove lines 14-17
<0> k
<0> plz plz forgive me. i think i never understood what you was saying.
<0> it works like u said it would
<0> so sorry for wasting your time
<0> <1> You the man, thanks alot bro. I shall always remebr your name :)
<1> well, thank you for contributing to my ignore list
<0> no problem , i am a busy man :)
<0> oh man, do i feel happy. Yeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
<2> I have an access table of categories with three columns: CategoryID (autonumber primary key), name (text), and ParentID (number), all in whatever random order they were entered in. What I'd like to do is iterate through all of the top-level and parent categories and return them with their child categories listed underneath them respectively, using an SQL query(s)
<2> If I were doing this in some host scripting context it would be simple enough, but all i have is pure access/sql to work with at the moment
<2> I'm unsure of what direction to take... I've gotten it to return all rows who are marked top level or claimed as parent by any other rows using a subquery, not sure where to go from there
<2> ...Or if it's possible, given the lack of control structures
<3> ok.. this is for ms sql.. I'm trying to figure out the best way to do this.. I have a table with a varchar field (name) and an id.. I also have a table that links it to a third table.. I want to take the varchar and split each one by ' ' and create a record for each word in the first table.. any suggestions? or did that even make sense?
<4> hi, I'm using pgsql and I'm trying to construct a query where you 'select distinct name from foo;' but I'd also like to get any id from foo matching the name for each distinct name
<5> that would then make the name not distinct
<4> perhaps I can better rephrase this
<4> i have a table that is keyed off a sequence and i want to return distinct names from that table and any corresponding sequence number for each name
<5> can a name have more than one sequence number?
<4> yes
<4> but only 1 seq per name
<5> and which sequence of the many for each name did you want, do you care?
<4> no
<5> select max(seqID) as theSequence, name from foo group by name
<4> thank you
<5> sure
<6> need help with a delete statement that deletes all rows where [timestamp] is 10 mins less than the current time
<6> i'm coding a stored procedure (mssql2000)
<6> i'm about to p*** out .. if you feel like helping me out .. please email me an example shaunpennell@hotmail.com .. thanks! and good night.
<5> um, no.
<7> In an update statement, is it possible to reference the row being updated in a subselect? Like "update myTable t1 set name = (select name from myTable t2 where t1.id = t2.id and t2.deleted = 'false')"
<7> i get the error: Incorrect syntax near 'm1'.
<5> which db
<5> and i don't see m1 anywhere in that statement
<7> sorry, t1
<5> db?
<7> mssql 2000
<5> is it supposed to be two separate tables?
<5> its unclear what you're trying to do
<7> no it is the same table
<5> in plain english then what are you trying to do?
<8> I have a PL/SQL question... is there a way to get the SQL used to create a table somehow using PL/SQL? I am not seeing an option for it like MSSQL's Query Analyzer has...
<8> Or why when I say: alter table PROFILE_DEFAULTS modify Unique_ID null it says cannot modify to NULL ?
<7> this was as implified example, what i try to do is update a duplicateOf column, for each row find the first row in the table with equal 'name' column as "this row"
<7> ..simplified
<5> UPDATE t1 SET t1.name = t2.name FROM myTable t1 INNER JOIN myTable t2 ON t1.ID = t2.ID WHERE t2.deleted = 'false'
<5> try that, unclear if that will get you the results you want
<7> i think we're on to something here.. thanks a bunch!
<7> i have a sql query that gives me the correct values, just couldn't express it in an update statement
<5> UPDATE alias SET blah = 1 FROM table alias
<8> Does MSSQL Express Evaulation version come with Query Analyzer?
<9> Hi.. Could you help me with this? I have a product and a category table, and nxn relation ship... but I want to list the products, one row each... how do I do this? the category names do not need to be complete for each product, only one per product is enough in the list..
<9> if I do an ordinary join, I get several rows for each product...
<10> your dumb
<9> ok show me how smart you are
<9> if you are not dumber
<5> stars2k, not sure what an 'ordinary' join is, but you want an inner join
<9> yes.. but is it possible to limit row on joins? if I do an inner join I get several rows per product
<5> then you're not doing it right
<5> paste what you have
<5> to the paste url
<9> well my real example is complicated, but the example would just be like select * from product p join product2category pc on p.id = pc.productid join category c on pc.categoryid = c.id
<10> hes an idiot
<10> hes trying to get back 1 value from a 1-m relationship
<10> lets say you are selling pictures
<9> yeah
<10> and picture 2 is in 2 categories
<9> yep
<10> fluffy bunnies and dog ****s
<9> hihi
<10> what if you only return fluffy bunnies
<9> its ok
<9> I just want one
<10> and some little girl gets a pic of a of fluffy bunny and a dog ****
<10> thats stupid
<10> you need to know which one stars2k
<10> either by max alpha betical order
<9> no I dont
<10> or sometthing
<9> aha.. ok.. doesnt matter.. give me anything that works ;)
<10> you need to use an aggregate function that returns one value
<10> no I wont
<10> you figure it out yourself dog **** peddler
<9> haha.. you are too much
<9> well I guees I could group them and use one such aggregate function ok.. thanks
<9> I think you should have a etiquette policy in this channel
<5> there is, he's complying. sad.
<5> you should see when they really don't like you
<9> hehe
<9> lol, ok, I'm glad I've not seen that
<11> how can i fully integrate Access 2003 with SQL Server 2005? right now I can't even write data from Access
<11> when i try to edit the design Access says that it is only compatable up to SQL Server 2000
<12> have you tried to upgrade?
<11> upgrade what?
<11> yes
<11> you mean update?
<12> update access?
<11> yes MS office updates
<11> there are no updates available. afaik access 2003 is the latest version
<13> http://www.sqlteam.com/Forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=59725
<14> cd
<11> Halo_Four: thanks
<12> cd ..
<14> heh, ****ing mouse focus ... I nudged the desk when I sat down ... changed focus to x-chat from konsole ;)
Return to
#sql
or
Go to some related
logs:
#politics
#politics
#politics
#sex
Discoveries this week, ariel
dj_alex turkey
suse kstartup
#beginner
NeoBlocks Strategy
Kirupa_3D_05_PullThroughSpace
|
|