Stefan Schwarzer wrote:
Hi there,
if I order a given year in DESCending ORDER, so that the highest
values (of a given variable) for the countries are displayed at the
top of the list, then actually the NULL values appear as first. Only
below, I find the values ordered correctly.
Is there an
Stefan Schwarzer ha scritto:
From 8.3 beta release notes:
- ORDER BY ... NULLS FIRST/LAST
I think this is what you want right?
Yes, indeed. Sounds great. unfortunately I am on 8.1. And wouldn't
really want to migrate to 8.3 and beta for the moment
order by 1 ?
---
From 8.3 beta release notes:
- ORDER BY ... NULLS FIRST/LAST
I think this is what you want right?
Yes, indeed. Sounds great. unfortunately I am on 8.1. And
wouldn't really want to migrate to 8.3 and beta for the moment
Thanks anyway!
Stef
---(end of broadca
Richard Huxton escribió:
Stefan Schwarzer wrote:
Hi there,
if I order a given year in DESCending ORDER, so that the highest
values (of a given variable) for the countries are displayed at the
top of the list, then actually the NULL values appear as first.
Only below, I find the values ordered
Stefan Schwarzer wrote:
Hi there,
if I order a given year in DESCending ORDER, so that the highest
values (of a given variable) for the countries are displayed at the
top of the list, then actually the NULL values appear as first. Only
below, I find the values ordered correctly.
Is there any
Hi there,
if I order a given year in DESCending ORDER, so that the highest
values (of a given variable) for the countries are displayed at
the top of the list, then actually the NULL values appear as
first. Only below, I find the values ordered correctly.
Is there any way to
a) make the
Stefan Schwarzer wrote:
Hi there,
if I order a given year in DESCending ORDER, so that the highest values
(of a given variable) for the countries are displayed at the top of the
list, then actually the NULL values appear as first. Only below, I find
the values ordered correctly.
Is there an
Hi there,
if I order a given year in DESCending ORDER, so that the highest
values (of a given variable) for the countries are displayed at the
top of the list, then actually the NULL values appear as first. Only
below, I find the values ordered correctly.
Is there any way to
a) make t
On Mon, 1 Mar 2004, Thomas Beutin wrote:
> when i do the following query i get an wrong result order on my postgres
> system (PostgreSQL 7.2.4 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC) 3.2.2)
>
> tb_test=# SELECT name, upper(name) FROM tb_wurst ORDER BY upper(name);
>name
Hi,
when i do the following query i get an wrong result order on my postgres
system (PostgreSQL 7.2.4 on i686-pc-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC) 3.2.2)
tb_test=# SELECT name, upper(name) FROM tb_wurst ORDER BY upper(name);
name | upper
--
Severin Olloz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why does Postgresql order the uppercase letters first?
That is locale dependent - if you don't use a proper locale but use
straight ASCII, A...Za...d would be correct. If you set a locale,
you'll get (Aa)(Bb) etc instead, which is the correct way to so
On Wed, Jun 06, 2001 at 03:17:36AM +0200, Severin Olloz wrote:
> Hello...
>
> Why does Postgresql order the uppercase letters first?
Because all uppercase letters come before the lowercase letters. Maybe
"ORDER BY lower()" will work? This should also be locale
dependent ...
--
Eric G. Miller
Hello...
Why does Postgresql order the uppercase letters first?
I have e.g. a table with one row an in this row there are follow values:
row1
ADC
aa
ABC
With this select-syntax
select * from table order by row1
I become this output
ABC
ADC
aa
but I want this ouptut:
aa
ABC
ADC
What
Hi see this :
test=> select ch from test order by ch ;
ch
--
aa (1)
bb
cc
-- cc --(2)
dd
-- vv --
www
{www} (3)
zz
(9 rows)
test=>
My problem is I want the line (2) appears in first and the line (3
14 matches
Mail list logo
