From: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Baiju MP <baiju(at)ipath(dot)net(dot)in> |
Cc: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [BUGS] A little bug in postgreSQL |
Date: | 2002-11-27 00:55:13 |
Message-ID: | 20021126164825.G84659-100000@megazone23.bigpanda.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-general |
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002, Baiju MP wrote:
[Note, -bugs is the wrong place for this sort of message,
-general is more appropriate]
> We are using postgreSQL for two years for our projects.
> It's fine and working well and meets all out requirements.
> But one think I could find when comparing with other simple
> databases is I am mentioning here . Hope your developing team
> will consider this also while releasing the new version.
>
> At present the all other database, providing an option to set
> developers own order with the order by statement.
> eg : SELECT ......
> FROM ......
> ORDER BY 1 like 'A%' like 'H%' like 'G%' like 'C%'
I believe you can do this sort of thing already in postgresql by
defining an operator that provides the ordering you want and
doing ORDER BY 1 USING operator. This appears to work in at least
7.3 for a trivial example.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-11-27 02:02:11 | Re: Bug #823: upper() does not handle , and correctly. |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-11-26 23:53:04 | Re: Minor build nits in 7.3rc1 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Lee Harr | 2002-11-27 00:55:47 | Re: postgres taking longer to update |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-11-26 23:20:10 | Request from eWeek for 7.3 comments |