Re: NOT and AND problem - Mailing list pgsql-sql
From | |
---|---|
Subject | Re: NOT and AND problem |
Date | |
Msg-id | 010b01c34c6f$ca5bcac0$2766f30a@development.greatgulfhomes.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | NOT and AND problem ("Richard Jones" <r.d.jones@ed.ac.uk>) |
Responses |
Re: NOT and AND problem
|
List | pgsql-sql |
DELETE FROM myTable WHERE NOT (SELECT 1 FROM item WHERE myTable.item_id = item.item_id) AND NOT (SELECT 1 FROM ep WHERE myTable.group_id = ep.group_id); Terry Fielder Manager Software Development and Deployment Great Gulf Homes / Ashton Woods Homes terry@greatgulfhomes.com Fax: (416) 441-9085 > -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-sql-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Richard Jones > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 10:29 AM > To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org > Subject: [SQL] NOT and AND problem > > > Dear All, > > I am having some confusion over a query which is supposed to > achieve the > following: To remove a record from a table if the one or both of the > columns containing references to other tables no longer point > to table rows > which still exist. There are good reasons why I cannot use > foreign keys to > maintain referential integrity, but I will not go into them, > but they give > rise to the need to "clean-up" my database table from time to > time. The > query that I have had most success with looks like this: > > DELETE FROM myTable > WHERE (NOT myTable.item_id = item.item_id) > AND (NOT myTable.group_id = ep.group_id); > > Which is odd, because logically it shouldn't work. What I > find with the > above queries is that as follows: > > let myTable.item_id = item.item_id be A > let myTable.group_id = ep.group_id be B > > The derived and actual truth tables for the results of the > where clause > follow: > > Derived: > A | B | Result > 1 | 1 | 0 > 1 | 0 | 0 > 0 | 1 | 0 > 0 | 0 | 1 > > Actual: > A | B | Result > 1 | 1 | 0 > 1 | 0 | 0 > 0 | 1 | 1 > 0 | 0 | 1 > > This makes no sense to me, as effectively rows 2 and 3 of the > Actual results > truth table are the same (unless there's some subtle > difference with regards > to the order of the statements, otherwise just substitute A > for B and vice > versa). > > The result that I actually want from the operation is this: > > A | B | Result > 1 | 1 | 0 > 1 | 0 | 1 > 0 | 1 | 1 > 0 | 0 | 1 > > which would suggest a query like: > > DELETE FROM myTable > WHERE NOT (myTable.item_id = item.item_id AND myTable.group_id = > ep.group_id); > > which ought to provide the above output. Instead, using this > query, the > output I get is as follows: > > A | B | Result > 1 | 1 | 1 > 1 | 0 | 1 > 0 | 1 | 1 > 0 | 0 | 1 > > I can only conclude that Postgres is doing something with > regards to the > other two tables which I am unaware of. Can anyone help me > understand what > is going on? Any suggestions gratefully received. > > Cheers > > Richard > > > Richard Jones > ----------------------- > Systems Developer > Theses Alive! - www.thesesalive.ac.uk > Edinburgh University Library > r.d.jones@ed.ac.uk > 0131 651 1611 > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to > majordomo@postgresql.org) >