>> >> SELECT * FROM movies.names WHERE mov_id IN (SELECT DISTINCT mov_id
>> >> WHERE
>> >> mov_name like '%, %' LIMIT 2)
>>
>> IF the subquery would only have returned 2 ids, then there would be at
>> most
>> like +/-10 records affected. each mov_id can hold one or more (usuals up
>> to
>> 5) names. but here, the subquery seemed to return ~3700 distinct mov_ids,
>> thus around 37000 names where damaged by the following programmatical
>> updates instead of only a hands full...
>>
>
> have you tested the query in psql?
> what results do you get?
the data is damaged so the result isn't the same... regenearting it now from
a backup.
from first tests i would say it returned records with names that match the
WHERE in the subselect. i guess what happened is: it took each record in
movies.names, then run the subquery for that record which resulted in "WHERE
mov_id IN (mov_id)" = true for records with a ', ' in the name and "WHERE
mov_id IN ()" = false for all others.
- thomas