Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT?
Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
From: Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>
To: Lucas Adamski <ladamski@manageww.com>
Cc: "Postgresql Performance Mailing list (E-mail)" <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Date: 2003-05-07T19:36:42Z
Lists: pgsql-performance
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Lucas Adamski wrote: > I'm not sure if this a performance question or a sql question really, but > since my primarily peeve here is performance, here goes: > > I'm trying to write a query which takes the output of a join and shows me > only what the items that are in the main join but not in the subselect of > just one of the tables in the join, using EXCEPT. > > This is a little complicated, so please bear with me. > > I have two tables: an event table that logs random events as they come in, > and a tracking table that keeps a state of events it cares about. In this > particular case I'm trying to obtain a list of tracking pkeys for related > event data that do not correspond to a certain (other) set of event data. > > Ideally, here is what I want: > > SELECT tracking.pk,events.data1,events.data2 FROM tracking,events WHERE > tracking.event_fk = event.pk EXCEPT (SELECT events.data1,events.data2 FROM > events WHERE event.type = 10) Maybe something like (if I'm right in assuming that you want any event whose data1 and data2 match an event having type 10): select tracking.pk, e.data1, e.data2 from tracking, ((select data1,data2 from events) except (select data1,data2 from events where event.type=10)) e where tracking.event_fk=e.pk; > The official solution to this I believe would be to just use CORRESPONDING > BY, but that's not supported by PG (why exactly, oh why!) Because it's not entry level SQL92 and noone's implemented it yet. :)