Re: Update Query doesn't affect all records
| От | Sam Mason |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Update Query doesn't affect all records |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20090805173319.GS5407@samason.me.uk обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Update Query doesn't affect all records (Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Update Query doesn't affect all records
|
| Список | pgsql-general |
On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 11:27:52AM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Csaba Nagy<nagy@ecircle-ag.com> wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 14:15 +0200, Schindler Andor wrote: > >> Can anyone tell me, how this is possible? If we insert 12 on the end, then > >> it decreases, but 11 remains the same. The problem only occurs, when the > >> where condition contains "sorrend > 9" or less. > > > > I bet the "sorrend" column is of some text type, and the "sorrend > 9" > > comparison is a text comparison. Try "sorrend::integer > 9" and it > > should work ;-) > > That's kinda what I was thinking at first, but the pastebin he posted > showed them in proper int type order. Also the fact that 12 "works". > Otherwise we're blind men describing an elephant. Interesting analogy, not heard that one before! -- Sam http://samason.me.uk/
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: