THanks - That's a good question.
I thought of using one single SQL statement - but the nested entity's
query is actually quite complex (unlike the example).
So it'd be possible, but more readable as a separate query.
Further, MySQL has some limitations also about temporary tables and
seems l
Why can't we use single entity with single SELECT ... LEFT OUTER JOIN ...?
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Hendler [mailto:jonathan.hend...@gmail.com]
> Sent: October-28-09 1:33 PM
> To: solr-user@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Simple problem with a nested entity and it's SQL
>
> I
Awesome! Its not a bad solution at all.
Cheers
Avlesh
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:33 PM, Jonathan Hendler <
jonathan.hend...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks - that solution still causes an error.
>
> But it helped me think of an SQL solution like so :
> CONVERT ( '${table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key}
Thanks - that solution still causes an error.
But it helped me think of an SQL solution like so :
CONVERT ( '${table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key}' , UNSIGNED INTEGER )
Convert the integer or NULL to a string, then back again. (ugly but it
works)
On Oct 28, 2009, at 1:48 PM, Avlesh Singh
Assuming this to be MySQL, will this work -
SELECT * FROM table2 WHERE id =
IF(ISNULL(${table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key}), 0,
${table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key});
Cheers
Avlesh
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:12 PM, Jonathan Hendler <
jonathan.hend...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No - the SQL will fail
No - the SQL will fail to validate because at runtime it will look like
SELECT * FROM table2 WHERE
IS NOT NULL table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key
AND table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key > 0
AND id =
Note the "id = "
On Oct 28, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Avlesh Singh wrote:
Shouldn't this work too?
Shouldn't this work too?
SELECT * FROM table2 WHERE IS NOT NULL
${table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key} AND
${table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key} > 0 AND id =
${table1.somethin_like_a_foreign_key}
Cheers
Avlesh
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:03 PM, Jonathan Hendler <
jonathan.hend...@gmail.com> wrote:
