M Hellmuth Vargas wrote:
> Hi
>
> can see:
>
>
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4928054/postgresql-wildcard-like-for-any-of-a-list-of-words
>
> 2017-09-04 22:42 GMT-05:00 Ryan Murphy :
>
>> > I'm pretty sure it doesn't work syntactically
> I'm pretty sure it doesn't work syntactically. Don't recall the details
offhand.
Ok, thanks!
>
> I'm not sure why we've never got round to providing such a thing
> in core ... probably lack of consensus on what to name the reverse
> operator. You'd need to support regex cases as well, so there's
> more than one operator name to come up with.
>
Interesting! It seems like one "simple" poss
e.g. I know you can do
select * from post
where 'music' = any(tags);
Which is similar to saying tags @> '{music}'.
And I see that I can even do:
select * from post
where 'music' LIKE any(tags);
...implying that ANY is more general in some ways than @>,
e.g. it can would with LIKE as well as =.
> Because I specifically aliased the first task reference using AS task_1.
>
>
Ok, totally. I missed that when I first read your query, didn't read it
closely enough. Thanks.
> You're confused about the input vs. the output. The output columns
> of a view all have to have distinct names, just like you can't do
> "create table foo (f1 int, f1 int)". They can be reading the same
> values, though.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Ok, that makes sense. Tha
> You're confused about the input vs. the output. The output columns
> of a view all have to have distinct names, just like you can't do
> "create table foo (f1 int, f1 int)". They can be reading the same
> values, though.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
Ok, that makes sense. Tha
Interesting, thanks! Do you know why the first one fails instead of doing
that renaming process, while your version succeeds?
On Monday, September 5, 2016, Adrian Klaver
wrote:
> On 09/05/2016 12:55 PM, Ryan Murphy wrote:
>
>> Hello, I have a question about views in Postgres.
&
Hello, I have a question about views in Postgres.
Given a table like so:
create table todo (
id serial,
task text,
done_time timestamp default null
);
it is legal (though perhaps not advised, by some) to query it like so:
select task, * from todo;
This gives a result with 2 redundant "ta
