|
database
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Who has the highest bid?Hi I have a table with items and bidders
Bob Mike Sally Lamp 10 30 40 Chair 20 50 90 Sofa 19 42 73 Bed 10 19 400 I need a query that will show who had the highest bid for each item Thanks!!!!!! Totally lost On first glance, that is a poor way to structure a table for auctions.
Anyway, do: SELECT item, MAX( CASE x WHEN 1 THEN 'Bob' WHEN 2 THEN 'Mike' WHEN 3 THEN 'Sally' END ) FROM tbl, ( SELECT 1 UNION SELECT 2 UNION SELECT 3 ) Nbrs ( x ) GROUP BY item ; -- Anith That pulls up Sally as the high bid for every item.
That is crap. You think I can't tell the difference? I can't make Sally the winner always. People will be angry. Try again. Show quote > > Ah, I used quotes around the column names by mistake. Remove them.
-- Anith OK then - I take back the crap part.
Thanks a lot! Show quote "Anith Sen" <an***@bizdatasolutions.com> wrote in message news:e8R$Er0MGHA.3708@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > Ah, I used quotes around the column names by mistake. Remove them. > > -- > Anith > Crap, crap, crap!!!
Now that only gives me the amount. I need the name of the high bidder and it is not always Sally. Please find your drawing board and go back to it quickly. Mayte wrote:
> Crap, crap, crap!!! Q. Where does the name of the highest bidder appear in your table?> Now that only gives me the amount. I need the name of the high bidder and > it is not always Sally. > Please find your drawing board and go back to it quickly. Hint: Queries work with data, they don't retrieve data from column names. Sorry, but "normalized" or not your table design is hopelessly naive. -- David Portas, SQL Server MVP Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem. Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps. State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content of any error messages. SQL Server Books Online: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx -- NO, I distilled the true nature of my table into an example table that would
be so "Hopelessly simple" that even you could answer my question. Still, It was not simple enough, because you haven't figured it out yet. Shows you how dumb you can be. It also shows how condescending IT people can be when they spend infinitely more time OBSTRUCTING with stupid advice, or OBFISCATING ratherer than answering THE SIMPLE question. I think my little test question has proven A LOT about nimwits. YOU NIMWIT Well, you just shot any chance of me helping you. Nice attitude when you
ask people to help you for free. Good luck. Show quote "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote in message news:l7-dne0LIvJ4iGjeRVn-vw@comcast.com... > NO, I distilled the true nature of my table into an example table that > would be so "Hopelessly simple" that even you could answer my question. > > Still, It was not simple enough, because you haven't figured it out yet. > > Shows you how dumb you can be. > > It also shows how condescending IT people can be when they spend > infinitely more time OBSTRUCTING with stupid advice, or OBFISCATING > ratherer than answering THE SIMPLE question. > > I think my little test question has proven A LOT about nimwits. > > YOU NIMWIT > > > > Good, I went through half a dozen morons, all of whom insulted me and
postulated about database design complete nonsense rather than help me, gave me wrong advice, poorly thought out quieries, condescencing useless help. No wonder they sitting are in their underpants helping people for free.. Who needs one more moron to chime in. Go jack the next guy around. Thanks PlayDough, perhaps you have made spamming less objectionable.
I think you should subtract yourself here and stick to your favorite sandbox.Why not raise the intellectual level of both groups? Show quote "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote in message news:SNednWK_x7COgmjenZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com... > Good, I went through half a dozen morons, all of whom insulted me and > postulated about database design complete nonsense rather than help me, gave > me wrong advice, poorly thought out quieries, condescencing useless help. > No wonder they sitting are in their underpants helping people for free.. > Who needs one more moron to chime in. > Go jack the next guy around. > > > Is your belt nouched Sodbuster?
Show quote "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote in message news:K--dnc0JFIhJuGjeRVn-sw@comcast.com... > Ding! Another one! > > > All that and you havn't even met Celko yet ...
Show quote "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote in message news:SNednWK_x7COgmjenZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@comcast.com... > Good, I went through half a dozen morons, all of whom insulted me and > postulated about database design complete nonsense rather than help me, > gave me wrong advice, poorly thought out quieries, condescencing useless > help. > No wonder they sitting are in their underpants helping people for free.. > Who needs one more moron to chime in. > Go jack the next guy around. > > > Mayte wrote:
Show quote > NO, I distilled the true nature of my table into an example table that would Patient: I'm going to shoot myself in the head. How can I prevent it> be so "Hopelessly simple" that even you could answer my question. > > Still, It was not simple enough, because you haven't figured it out yet. > > Shows you how dumb you can be. > > It also shows how condescending IT people can be when they spend infinitely > more time OBSTRUCTING with stupid advice, or OBFISCATING ratherer than > answering THE SIMPLE question. > > I think my little test question has proven A LOT about nimwits. > > YOU NIMWIT from hurting? Doctor: Don't shoot yourself! Patient: That's not what I asked! I really need to shoot myself but I don't want it to hurt. Doctor: Why would you do that? Please don't shoot yourself. It really isn't sensible. Patient: Are you too stupid to understand? I asked a simple question. I don't need your kind of advice. Nimwit! Doctor: Bye then. Mayte wrote:
> Thanks for that advice. Nope. Too hard for me.> You still couldn't figure the query then, eh? Mayte wrote:
> If I were nicer would it help you figure it out? If you were smarter you might have thought about that some time ago.Still can't just answer the question can you.
Thanks for all that doctor advice, and the close attention you are paying to the thread. You should change professions. You really should. Actually, your problem has been figured out for you several times,
you're simply too arrogant to notice. Personally, I am amazed that people on this list have been as patient with you as they have. Your attitude is so ridiculous that I wouldn't be suprised if you are, in fact, knowledgable in SQL and database design and just giving yourself a good laugh at our expense. Otherwise your comments seem extremely naive and infantile. Here are some tutorials for you - perhaps when you're learned some very basic DB basics you will realize that everyone here was, in fact, trying to help you. http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/99/13/index1a_page2.html?tw=backend If that made sense, step it up a notch. You could always read a book, too. http://db.grussell.org/section002.html http://www.sitepoint.com/print/sql-server-2000-database http://database.ittoolbox.com/documents/industry-articles/an-introduction-to-database-normalization-611 http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/intro-to-normalization.html Good luck, Mayte, on many levels. Mayte wrote: Show quote > If I were nicer would it help you figure it out? I've told you. My database is normalized. It is just as it should be.
There will be no new Bidders. It was just a distilled example to give you a bare-bones sample of the type of query in which I am interested. I threw a bone to monkeys. I am already familiar with your links and samples, and now insults and condescending advice. >> My database is normalized. It is just as it should be. << No it is not normalized. You have posted a crosstab grid in which thevalues of attributes are flipped into attributes (columns). >> There will be no new Bidders. << That is a constraint on the attribute "bidder". Bidders are clearlyentities, so they need a table. Ditto auction items. Try something like this: CREATE TABLE Bidders (bidder_nbr INTEGER NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY, bidder_name CHAR(20) NOT NULL, ..); CREATE TABLE Auctions (bidder_nbr INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES Bidders(bidder_id) ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE, bid_amt DECIMAL (12,2) NOT NULL CHECK (bid_amt > 0.00), item_nbr INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES Inventory(item_nbr) ON DELETE CASCADE ON UPDATE CASCADE, bid_date DATETIME DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (bidder_id, item_nbr), ..); Do not do this with a query; things are subject to a closing date, so you will want to see changes as they happen. CREATE VIEW (bidder_id, item_nbr, bid_amt) AS SELECT A1.bidder_id, A1.item_nbr, A1.bid_amt FROM Auctions AS A1 WHERE bid_amt = (SELECT MAX (A2.bid_amt) FROM Auctions AS A2 WHERE A1.item_nbr = A2.item_nbr); We have no rule for ties, so this displays them . And are you aware of Vickery auctions and other methods from Auction Theory? Mayte wrote:
Show quote > Hi I have a table with items and bidders Are you responsible for such a silly table design? Surely you don't> > Bob Mike Sally > Lamp 10 30 40 > Chair 20 50 90 > Sofa 19 42 73 > Bed 10 19 400 > > I need a query that will show who had the highest bid for each item > > Thanks!!!!!! > > Totally lost have to work with this? Better try: CREATE TABLE bids (item_id INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES items (item_id), bidder_id INTEGER NOT NULL REFERENCES bidders (bidder_id), bid_date DATETIME NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, bid_amount NUMERIC(10,2) NOT NULL, PRIMARY KEY(item_id, bidder_id, bid_date)); SELECT B.bidder_id, B.bidder_name, C.item_id, C.bid_amount FROM bidders AS B JOIN bids AS C ON B.bidder_id = C.bidder_id WHERE C.bid_amount = (SELECT MAX(bid_amount) FROM bids AS D WHERE D.item_id = C.item_id); -- David Portas, SQL Server MVP Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem. Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps. State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content of any error messages. SQL Server Books Online: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx -- Mayte wrote:
> what is wrong with my table design. Surely you don't want to keep adding new columns every time a newbidder comes along. Putting data such as names of people into column names is highly inconvenient. You can't easly query and filter a set of column names. You can't enforce referential integrity against the data. You can't do joins against them for reports like this one, etc, etc. You should study some database design basics or get some help with this. Unfortunately it isn't easy to design a good database in an online forum. It's much easier to pick holes in weak designs. -- David Portas, SQL Server MVP Whenever possible please post enough code to reproduce your problem. Including CREATE TABLE and INSERT statements usually helps. State what version of SQL Server you are using and specify the content of any error messages. SQL Server Books Online: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/library/ms130214(en-US,SQL.90).aspx -- On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:18:28 -0700, "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote: It is not normalized. SQL works great with normalized data, but only>what is wrong with my table design. a SQL expert can write it to work against a table such as you describe ( but they wouldn't generally find themselves in that postion!) I suggest googleing datbase normalization and read up a bit. Bob, Mike and Sally should not be columns, they should be values in a Bidder column. The two column key to the row becomes the Item (Lamp, Chair, etc) and the Bidder, and the BidValue is the third column. Roy Oh, it's normalized alright.
You're thinking that it won't work in an acution setting and you may be right, but the table and the data are normailized as I described them. Normalized? Do you know what this word actually means in the contenxt of
RDBMS? What you're asking is more of a job for MS Excel. Go in there and click up a pivot table. You can also add color and change fonts. You know - to normalize the result. ML Come on m8- You should help him out. Answer his question.
Well we all know that you can't. But that's beside the point. Looks like he found the holy grail of un-answerable questions. The question has been answered several times now. Since most of the answers
are in compliance with the basics of RDBMS and T-SQL, and the OP still refuses to acknowledge that, I've given him an alternative. We're all just guessing what the OP is actually after, and judging by his replies he doesn't seem to actually want a sound solution anyway. ML --- http://milambda.blogspot.com/ GIGO.
Ta, M Show quote "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote in message news:psWdnZlPmoH1mWjeRVn-pA@comcast.com... > Oh, it's normalized alright. > > You're thinking that it won't work in an acution setting and you may be > right, but the table and the data are normailized as I described them. > > What does your table look like? It would help if you posted a DDL:
http://www.aspfaq.com/etiquette.asp?id=5006 Ideally, you should have is a table for bidders (& bids) and a table for Items, and yet another table to store only item IDs and bid IDs. At the very least, you might want to create such a structure using pivot table (wow, this is the first time I've seen a real use for pivot table) to move the data shown into a structure like this: tbl_Items bidder bid item ==================== Sally 40 Lamp Mike 30 Lamp Bob 10 Lamp Sally 90 Chair Mike 50 Chair Bob 20 Chair etc Then your query would be SELECT TOP 1 bidder FROM tbl_Items ORDER BY bid DESC Maybe someone that's been doing this longer than me could help you with the pivot or other table conversion method that gets you to what I suggested. Mayte,
I believe the query below will give you both what you want and what you need. I made some assumptions about the data model of your table based on the sample data you provided. JT create table #auction ( item_name varchar(30), Bob int, Mike int, Sally int ) insert #auction values ('Lamp',10,30,40) insert #auction values ('Chair',20,50,90) insert #auction values ('Sofa',19,42,73) insert #auction values ('Bed',10,19,40) create table #nf_auction ( item_name varchar(30), bidder_name varchar(30), bid_amount money ) insert into #nf_auction select item_name, 'Bob' as bidder_name, Bob as bid_amount from #auction union all select item_name, 'Mike' as bidder_name, Mike as bid_amount from #auction union all select item_name, 'Sally' as bidder_name, Sally as bid_amount from #auction select item_name, bidder_name, bid_amount from #nf_auction where bid_amount = (select max(x.bid_amount) from #nf_auction as x where x.item_name = #nf_auction.item_name) drop table #auction drop table #nf_auction As expected, the result shows Sally as the highest bidder for each item. item_name bidder_name bid_amount ------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------- Sofa Sally 73.0000 Lamp Sally 40.0000 Chair Sally 90.0000 Bed Sally 40.0000 Show quote "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote in message news:7JOdnZfEZOvraGnenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@comcast.com... > Hi I have a table with items and bidders > > Bob Mike Sally > Lamp 10 30 40 > Chair 20 50 90 > Sofa 19 42 73 > Bed 10 19 400 > > I need a query that will show who had the highest bid for each item > > Thanks!!!!!! > > Totally lost > > > > > This one is so easy, I'm surprised no one else has figured it out yet.
Select item , 'Sally' winner from table1 Show quote "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> wrote in message news:7JOdnZfEZOvraGnenZ2dnUVZ_sydnZ2d@comcast.com... > Hi I have a table with items and bidders > > Bob Mike Sally > Lamp 10 30 40 > Chair 20 50 90 > Sofa 19 42 73 > Bed 10 19 400 > > I need a query that will show who had the highest bid for each item > > Thanks!!!!!! > > Totally lost > > > > > Mayte,
I am disappointed that someone, i.e you, has gone out of their way to post such rubbish. These Groups are here to help people with genuine problems and to share information that other people find useful. People are not forced to help other people - they do it of their own free will. Many people who have posted comments to your question have provided useful suggestions and solutions. Posting pseudo code is a very good idea - providing that it has, at the very least, some kind of resemblance to your *real* code. You posted pseudo, or at least I think pseudo code, and people *tried* to give you some advice. They tried to tell you that this is not the norm, to tell you that other solutions would be better. However, having read this advice you decide to insult people and tell them that they are , essentially stupid. If you don't want people to express their opinions then don't post anything. If you had taken any time to look at previous posts from the people who have replied, you will have found that they contribute to these Groups an awful lot. And more often than not, the posts they provide are accurate, helpful and often help people out of a complete mess. Thankfully, posts like yours is not a common occurrence, otherwise I'm sure people would just not bother to reply to posts. Before you make any comments, no I didn't even bother looking at your question as I was completely put off by your attitude and the fact that you seem to take great pleasure in annoying other people for the sake of it. As the old saying goes... If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all. Barry Everyone is really takign this way too seriously. This guy is clearly just
trolling and not looking for an answer to a question. I suppose I should have ignored the post rather than encourage the trolling, but even the most unstable person would be far more civil if they actually wanted help. The only thing the OP wants is a laugh, not a solution to a problem. Show quote "Barry" <barry.ocon***@manx.net> wrote in message news:1140203843.747205.323370@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Mayte, > > I am disappointed that someone, i.e you, has gone out of their way to > post such rubbish. These Groups are here to help people with genuine > problems and to share information that other people find useful. > People are not forced to help other people - they do it of their own > free will. > > Many people who have posted comments to your question have provided > useful suggestions and solutions. Posting pseudo code is a very good > idea - providing that it has, at the very least, some kind of > resemblance to your *real* code. You posted pseudo, or at least I > think pseudo code, and people *tried* to give you some advice. They > tried to tell you that this is not the norm, to tell you that other > solutions would be better. However, having read this advice you decide > to insult people and tell them that they are , essentially stupid. > > If you don't want people to express their opinions then don't post > anything. If you had taken any time to look at previous posts from the > people who have replied, you will have found that they contribute to > these Groups an awful lot. And more often than not, the posts they > provide are accurate, helpful and often help people out of a complete > mess. > > Thankfully, posts like yours is not a common occurrence, otherwise I'm > sure people would just not bother to reply to posts. > > Before you make any comments, no I didn't even bother looking at your > question as I was completely put off by your attitude and the fact that > you seem to take great pleasure in annoying other people for the sake > of it. > > As the old saying goes... If you can't say anything nice, don't say > anything at all. > > Barry > I guess - I just thinks it is bad form wasting people's time when there
are people out there who really do need help. But hey - thought I'd a put my 2p in... ;-) Barry I agree completely.
What surprises me is that folks allowed their time to be wasted after the second or third post, and continued to take it seriously. Show quote "Barry" <barry.ocon***@manx.net> wrote in message news:1140205164.749868.311600@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > I guess - I just thinks it is bad form wasting people's time when there > are people out there who really do need help. > > But hey - thought I'd a put my 2p in... ;-) > > Barry > If content is not filtered (as I think sometimes it should be), this one
might just make it to the list of most popular threads. :) Mayte, me matey, I guess you'll get famous. ML --- http://milambda.blogspot.com/ To me, the table looks completely normalized. Why are we going off on a
tangent? Anith Sen had the right query right off the bat. According to Roy Harvey, he is a SQL expert for writing the query. Since the query was so hard, why is so much time taken with the soap-boxing about what should or should not be posted? Sounds like a bunch of old hens in chicken coop. It was a straight-forward question that the guy posted, and of the dozens of (I'll have to agree with Mayte) complete morons posting a hundred different points of view-none of them the GET THIS>>>***simple***<<< answer. No wonder these guys post for "free". They must not have real jobs. Who could stand to work in the next cubicle? You would be driven mad by the sound of the wheels of complete idiocy grinding. Show quote "ML" <M*@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:44E9DBA6-C96B-4120-9751-E22234EACBBB@microsoft.com... > If content is not filtered (as I think sometimes it should be), this one > might just make it to the list of most popular threads. :) > > Mayte, me matey, I guess you'll get famous. > > > ML > > --- > http://milambda.blogspot.com/ >From: "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> and>NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.166.123.27 >From: "Pinata Brain" <ddaebl***@Q4sofd.com> If you want to engage in nymshifting, you should first learn to>NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.166.123.27 obfuscate your headers a bit better. >X-Complaints-To: ab***@comcast.net Report has been sent.-- Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP Why does that need a "report" from you?
Mayte wasn't getting an answer. Who the heck do you think you are? I 'm trying to get the question answered without a lot of baloney. That's all. I am just asking a question. Show quote "Hugo Kornelis" <h***@perFact.REMOVETHIS.info.INVALID> wrote in message news:8nocv1lmjs6b5d85tr3u1st1odnmnj2r4n@4ax.com... > >From: "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> >>NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.166.123.27 > > and > >>From: "Pinata Brain" <ddaebl***@Q4sofd.com> >>NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.166.123.27 > > If you want to engage in nymshifting, you should first learn to > obfuscate your headers a bit better. > >>X-Complaints-To: ab***@comcast.net > > Report has been sent. > > -- > Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP report me for not using a normalized table?
For using an alias? What is really deep down wrong_with_you? You still couldn't get the answer right could you. On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 00:25:57 -0700, Pinata Brain wrote:
>report me for not using a normalized table? For nymshifting. That's considered as a form of usenet abuse, that's why>For using an alias? I reported it to your ISP's abuse address. >What is really deep down wrong_with_you? No. Can you?> >You still couldn't get the answer right could you. -- Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server MVP nymshifting.
You poor baby why don't you, as I said. STEP ASIDE and let those who can help, help!!! I've asked you this before. Quit harrassimg me, quit replying to my posts. I'm trying TO AVOID YOU I don't need to obfiscate anything. I am not trying to "pull" anything you
"smart guy" Leave me alone. You do not get to MVP engage in MVP harrassment MVP no matter how stupid you think the questions are. I have a legitmate question, and I asked for a legitimate answer. If you don't not have the brain horsepower, step aside- do no obstruct, do not attemt to lead, follow - just get out of everyone's way so we can get the info we need, rather than your misguided interpretation of baloney. 100% of what is wrong with IT people. They just can't stop thinking of ways not to help people. They think they are a rock in a river- that everyone must just go around their simple-minded way of thinking. Normalized indeed. There was not one thing wrong with my table. >> Normalized indeed. There was not one thing wrong with my table. << No it is not normalized. You have posted a crosstab grid in which thevalues of attributes are flipped into attributes (columns). You have confused entities and attributes in violation of 1NF and DKNF. What you are saying is that "Sally" is not a human being, but a domain of integer values, that each auciton item is made up of four people. Why do you have such a hard time with this in face of overwhelming expertise? Hugo Kornelis wrote:
Show quote > >From: "Mayte" <debl***@Q4sod.com> Heh, nice catch, Hugo :)> >NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.166.123.27 > > and > > >From: "Pinata Brain" <ddaebl***@Q4sofd.com> > >NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.166.123.27 > > If you want to engage in nymshifting, you should first learn to > obfuscate your headers a bit better. > > >X-Complaints-To: ab***@comcast.net > > Report has been sent. Seems like someone being bored into trolling some, methinks... /impslayer No poster in this thread invented the rules of normalization, but most of us
have taken time to: 1. understand them; and 2. understand what failing to follow them can lead to. In fact, no one *needs* to understand the essence of what they do for a living, but it sure helps. But then again, in this great civilization of ours one can always count on someone else to clean up the mess, right? ML --- http://milambda.blogspot.com/ The column names should not have to confuse you so very badly.
Here is my table again, but with new column names. A column name does not make the table any more or less normalized. It should'nt make any difference to a qualified person what the column names are. a b c data1 10 30 40 data2 20 50 90 data3 19 42 73 data4 10 19 400 Now can you answer my question without calling me atroll, a nymshifer, a moron, all of those harrassing names. And just anwer the question If you can't, and you are an MVP, then shut the FF up. PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEAASE Where do I report abuse by MVPs? Stop calling me a troll. You should learn to be more professional. >> A column name does not make the table any more or less normalized. << How many times do we have to ask for DDL? Please stop posting yourpersonal pseudo-code and use SQL. Actually, the choice of Domains for the columns is vital. Look up 1NF, DKNF and basic data modeling. If you want a totally abstract RDBMS, that is fine. Then word query as an abstraction. But we still need a key, etc. What is the name of the column in which you diagrammed (data1, data2, data3, data4)? All rows have columns!! What is the domain of that column? What kind of attribute are an "A"? "B"? "C"? "D"? What are the constraints and the key(s)? How do all these "attributes" form a "whatever the heck this table models" entity? I am not "abusing" you as an MVP; I am abusing as one of the people who helped to write the SQL Standards, author of six books, 750+ articles, and about 20 years with RDBMS. So my little "simple" table has you shouting and scratching your head?
All I need is a query. I'm not saying I don;t understand your normalization theory, I'm saying it doesn't pertain to my query, so let's not discuss it here. Surely you understand what I am saying. If you give me the query, I will spend a few posts letting you go on about your books and teachings. Hi,
JT has given you an answer - does it work for you? Tony. Show quote "Pinata Brain" <ddaebl***@Q4sofd.com> wrote in message news:Z-WdnYPHUJZCQ2re4p2dnA@comcast.com... > The column names should not have to confuse you so very badly. > > Here is my table again, but with new column names. > A column name does not make the table any more or less normalized. > It should'nt make any difference to a qualified person what the column > names are. > > > > a b c > data1 10 30 40 > data2 20 50 90 > data3 19 42 73 > data4 10 19 400 > > Now can you answer my question without calling me atroll, a nymshifer, a > moron, all of those harrassing names. > And just anwer the question > If you can't, and you are an MVP, then shut the FF up. > > PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEAASE > > Where do I report abuse by MVPs? > Stop calling me a troll. You should learn to be more professional. > > |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interesting topics