should work. you could move b1 out of the sub query and add a normal where clause to make the syntax nicer. Might also matter for the query plan.
other than that i don't see any bumps. It's good that you placed "b2.org_specific_rule = true" in the join clause so that the left join works properly.
why the mixed feelings?
WBL
2012/4/19 Ondrej Ivanič
<ondrej.ivanic@gmail.com> Hi,
I have the following table:
org_id | contract_name | org_specific_rule | count
----------+------------------+-------------------+-------
smpj28p2 | Group 123 | f | 3
smpj28p2 | Group 2 | f | 3
smpj28p2 | Group 2 | t | 9
smpj28p2 | Group 1 | f | 1
w37mtn4r | Group 123 | f | 26
w37mtn4r | Group 2 | f | 56
w37mtn4r | Group 1 | f | 55
Based on org_specific_rule and (org_id, contract_name) I need to transform this:
smpj28p2 | Group 2 | f | 3
smpj28p2 | Group 2 | t | 9
to
smpj28p2 | Group 2 | 9
in other words:
- if org_specific_rule = t then update "count" value in row where
org_specific_rule = f to value from this row (3 was updated to 9)
- remove org_specific_rule column
I have query which does everything but I have mixed feelings about it:
select
b1.org_id, b1.contract_name, coalesce(b2.count, b1.count) as count
from (select * from billing where org_specific_rule = false) as b1
left join billing b2 on
b1.org_id = b2.org_id
and b1.contract_name = b2.contract_name
and b2.org_specific_rule = true
order by 1,2;
org_id | contract_name | count
----------+------------------+----------
smpj28p2 | Group 123 | 3
smpj28p2 | Group 2 | 9
smpj28p2 | Group 1 | 1
w37mtn4r | Group 123 | 26
w37mtn4r | Group 2 | 56
w37mtn4r | Group 1 | 55
Any ideas?
--
Ondrej Ivanic
(ondrej.ivanic@gmail.com)
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
--
"Patriotism is the conviction that your country is superior to all others because you were born in it." -- George Bernard Shaw