Richard Huxton wrote:
Sebastian Böck wrote:
Hello all,
why is the last definition of a view not working, although the
documentation says all three are equal?
CREATE OR REPLACE VIEW not_working AS
SELECT one.*
FROM one.one, two.two
JOIN join1 ON join1.id = one.id;
I think it'
Ragnar Hafstað wrote:
On Wed, 2005-05-25 at 13:09 +0200, Sebastian Böck wrote:
Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
Be wary of the NULL values though. :) Either don't use them, add
something like 'AND (text1 <> NEW.text1 OR text1 IS NULL OR NEW.text1
IS NULL)' or something more complicated. :)
Thanks fo
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
Well, I havn't run the rule so I don't know exactly whether it is
relevent, but simply put, RULEs are like *macro substitution*. In
macros, if you specify an expression (like a view) as an argument, it
is placed as a whole each place the argument is used.
Yes I und
Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
On 5/24/05, Sebastian Böck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
/* 3rd way of separating updates
con: unnecessary updates on tables
pro: view gets evaluated only 1 time
Not adressing the problem of unnecessary updates, but the view
gets only evaluated one time.
*/
CREATE
Jaime Casanova wrote:
On 5/24/05, Sebastian Böck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I'm sure I'm not the only one, but, what are you talking about? RULEs
are not really obvious so it would help if you could post an example of
what you mean...
I attach some sample SQL (
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
On Wed, Apr 27, 2005 at 04:50:23PM +0200,
Sebastian Böck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 48 lines which said:
CREATE UNIQUE INDEX na ON x (name, address) WHERE address IS NULL;
No, because it prevents two tuples with the same value of "name".
Ahh, sorry! Ment
