From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-sql(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [SQL] Ordering a date_part() query ... |
Date: | 2000-01-18 22:43:09 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.21.0001181842280.23487-100000@thelab.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> >> Uh, why don't you just GROUP BY and ORDER BY stat_period?
>
> > Okay, maybe I'm misunderstanding GROUP BY, but my understanding is that it
> > groups "like" values ... my above example would give me a count of all
> > impressions received over a one hour period ...
>
> Oh, so "stat_period" is not a period label but an exact timestamp,
> and you want to group into hourly blocks? OK, then group/order by
> date_trunc("hour", stat_period) is probably what you want...
good, ya had me worried I missed something in the docs on this one :)
> I'd suggest choosing another name for the field, too ;-)
*grin* I'm the only one that accesses it, so it doesn't much matter
Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc Tardif | 2000-01-19 10:56:35 | Re: [SQL] char(19) to varchar(32) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-01-18 22:26:37 | Re: [SQL] Ordering a date_part() query ... |