Can we get our stories straight :-) ?

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #139,740 by tuberculosis 2/4/04 11:44:38 AM Reply	Can we get our stories straight :-) ? After digging through 2+ page long dense queries with multiple layers of subselects, stupid naming conventions, and capitalization schemes adopted from ransom notes, I've concluded that database technology should be restricted to those who can pass basic competency tests. Anyhow, any details on what made it different? .....To the future or to the past, to a time when thought is free, when men are different from one another and do not live alone -- to a time when truth exists and what is done cannot be undone: .....From the age of uniformity, from the age of solitude, from the age of Big Brother, from the age of doublethink -- greetings! -- George Orwell, 1984
Post #139,743 by ben_tilly 2/4/04 11:48:06 AM Reply	I don't remember the exact bug But we did open a ticket with Oracle about it. And I think that it turned out to have been fixed in the next version. Incidentally on queries, ever had the fun yet of writing a query which is supposed to have output documenting the reasons for the decision that it made? Cheers, Ben "good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not" - [link\|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html\|Stefano Mazzocchi]
Post #139,745 by drewk 2/4/04 11:55:01 AM Reply	Incidentally, yes Multiple left join to the same table, and a big case statement in the field list that will return a flag indicating which of the joins actually had a match. Would have been so much easier with a subselct or stored procedure, but hey, we're a MySQL shop here. === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #140,053 by ben_tilly 2/5/04 2:56:23 PM Reply	A real pain, innit? I have a couple of "disaster queries" with that requirement. I build them up with lots of interpolation so that as conditions change, I am sure that they change the same way in the WHERE, a CASE statement in the SELECT, and the corresponding CASE statement in the GROUP BY. :-( Cheers, Ben "good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not" - [link\|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html\|Stefano Mazzocchi]
Post #140,082 by drewk 2/5/04 4:22:24 PM Reply	Nah, the real pain is ... The one with a table left joined to itself multiple times, and a triple-nested CASE in the field list. Don't even ask why. === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #140,126 by ben_tilly 2/5/04 7:57:39 PM Reply	I won't... I'll just comment that with a sane table design, there should be no reason to ever go there. (Of course I know how the real world works...) Cheers, Ben "good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not" - [link\|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html\|Stefano Mazzocchi]

select unique in oracle same as select distinct in postgres? -NT - (tuberculosis) - (9) - Feb. 3, 2004, 11:02:48 PM EST

Yes. - (admin) - (1) - Feb. 4, 2004, 12:00:53 AM EST

I didn't even know there WAS a "SELECT UNIQUE" in Oracle... -NT - (CRConrad) - Feb. 4, 2004, 08:37:22 AM EST

No - (ben_tilly) - (6) - Feb. 4, 2004, 11:39:27 AM EST

Can we get our stories straight :-) ? - (tuberculosis) - (5) - Feb. 4, 2004, 11:44:38 AM EST

I don't remember the exact bug - (ben_tilly) - (4) - Feb. 4, 2004, 11:48:06 AM EST

Incidentally, yes - (drewk) - (3) - Feb. 4, 2004, 11:55:01 AM EST

A real pain, innit? - (ben_tilly) - (2) - Feb. 5, 2004, 02:56:23 PM EST

Nah, the *real* pain is ... - (drewk) - (1) - Feb. 5, 2004, 04:22:24 PM EST

I won't... - (ben_tilly) - Feb. 5, 2004, 07:57:39 PM EST

iwethey.org

If the answer to your question starts with, "Well ... ", you're not going to like what comes next.
88 ms