Tom,
Thanks for that.
I'll be testing the converted system thoroughly, so should pick up all the anomalies that I've introduced!
I can now finish off some of the more obscure joins in the code before I start the data import and then testing.
On Sat, 2004-08-14 at 16:44, Tom Lane wrote:
Steve Tucknott <steve@retsol.co.uk> writes:
> How do I include the join of table F to table D where F.colD = D.colF in
> the case where 1) F is a LEFT OUTER and 2) where F is plain (INNER?)
> join
I think you just want to parenthesize the join constructs:
(a left join (f left join d on somecondition) on somecondition)
or
(a left join (f join d on somecondition) on somecondition)
However you need to be clear in your mind about the semantic behavior
you want before you can pick a join order, and your question certainly
didn't give enough detail for anyone to offer advice. In either one of
the above examples, D rows that don't have a join partner in F will
disappear before they get to the A join, resulting in different results
than you had before --- that is, some A rows that were joined to D rows
would now be extended with with nulls. If any of those rows make it to
the final output then you will see a different and probably less useful
answer.
The short form of my point is that outer joins aren't associative and so
the order in which you do them matters a lot. The reason JOIN is
syntactically like an operator is so that you can control that ordering
through parentheses.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
Regards,
Steve Tucknott
ReTSol Ltd
DDI: 01903 828769
|
