Am 12.05.23 um 13:04 schrieb Durumdara:
[...]
The LAG function seems to be ok, but how to handle if more than two periods
are missing?
03:00 10
03:01 NULL
03:02 NULL
03:03 NULL
03:04 11
03:05 13
[...]
and how do you think about NULL in first(and second/third) row?
On Sat, May 13, 2023 at 2:18 AM Andrew Gierth
wrote:
> > "Durumdara" == Durumdara writes:
>
> create table tmp_test_table(mmin,val)
>as select o, v
> from unnest(array[1,5,NULL,3,NULL,NULL,10,7,NULL,NULL,NULL,4])
>with ordinality as u(v,o);
> select * from tmp_te
> "Durumdara" == Durumdara writes:
Durumdara> I have to make a virtual table which is minute based.
Durumdara> I thought I would make a generated temp table
Durumdara> (generate_series) and then join these values based on minue.
Durumdara> 03:00 10
Durumdara> 03:01 NULL
Durum
On Fri, 12 May 2023, GF wrote:
>"The SQL standard defines a RESPECT NULLS or IGNORE NULLS option for lead,
>lag, first_value, last_value, and nth_value. This is not implemented in
>PostgreSQL: the behavior is always the same as the standard's default,
>namely RESPECT NULLS".
Yeah, THAT caused no
On Fri, 12 May 2023 at 13:04, Durumdara wrote:
> Dear Members!
>
> I have a table with temperature measures.
> The data is coming from the PLC, but sometimes the period is "slipping",
> so the values are not correctly minute based.
>
> 03:00 10
> 03:02 12
> 03:03 11
> 03:05 13
>
>
