Re: SQL subquery to supply table name?
От | Scott Chapman |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SQL subquery to supply table name? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200209261933.08021.scott_list@mischko.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SQL subquery to supply table name? (Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
On Thursday 26 September 2002 06:01 pm, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > I think the basic response is "don't do that". SQL doesn't support queries > where the tables are not predetermined. The query planner would have a > terrible time since it would not be able to estimate costs prior to > execution. It's too bad for the query planner then! :-) (I'm not a Postgresql guru and I really don't know what the problem would be if the query planner could not estimate costs beforehand. Don't take my "It's too bad" comment seriously!) > Since all your "subtables" are likely to have the same structure, why not > store them all in one table. Any particular reason? They don't have the same structure. Similar enough for my purposes but not the same. In all but two cases where I handle the data from the sub-tables, I handle columns common to the different tables (so these tables are not normalized completely but I knew that going in) or I hadle all the data as a unit. The two places where I handle the data specifically I determine which type of review it is and direct the user to a different web page to deal with the specifics. I can solve this problem by running two queries rather one query with a subquery but that's not as elegant. I was hoping to find a more elegant solution based on a sub-query. Scott
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: