On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 13:02:48 +0000
Alan Chandler <alan@chandlerfamily.org.uk> wrote:
> select name, id, transaction.date as tdate, description, -amount as amount
> from account left join transaction on name=src where name = 'Sarah'
> union
> select name, id, transaction.date as tdate, description, amount
> from account join transaction on name=dst where name ='Sarah'
> order by tdate asc;
>
> name | id | tdate | description | amount
> -------+----+------------+---------------------------+--------
> Sarah | 12 | 0005-06-05 | Ben 21st Birthday Pressie | 41
> Sarah | 13 | 0005-06-05 | Cash from Mum | 60
> Sarah | 14 | 0005-06-08 | Petrol | 27.33
> Sarah | 15 | 0005-06-10 | Petrol Allowance | -40
> Sarah | 11 | 2005-06-05 | Sarah Petrol | 27.74
> (5 rows)
>
> I can't figure out why the dates are not in order (see transaction 11 is out
> of place).
It looks to be in order to me. Transaction 11 is 2,000 years later
than the others. I suppose you are letting people enter two digit
dates without running it through a cleaner process. If you put "05" as
a year into a date field, PostgreSQL will take you at your word.
if year < 50: year += 2000
elif year < 100: year += 1900
That will probably handle most cases for you. Alternatively, don't
allow dates outside of your known domain.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
