In article <64dsgbF2asnp6U1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>"Robert" <no@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>news:s6f3u3dlalc0i5g0jq4gtilg43kke5nm0o@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:35:35 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
() wrote:
[snip]
>>>(note - this is a shop that runs on files, not on a database)
[snip]
>> select name, separation_date, dirty_money
>> from employees emp,
>> (select employee, sum(amount_paid) as dirty_money
>> from payroll_detail pd
>> where debit_account = '6969'
>> and payment_date between to_date(20051001) and sysdate
>> group by employee
>> having dirty_money > 0) crook
>> where crook.employee = emp.employee
>> and emp.separation_date is not null
>> and emp.division in
>> (select division from divisions where division_name like
>> 'Midwest%')
>> and emp.start_date >
>> (select min(start_date) from employees where name like
'%Dwarf%')
>>
>> -- Query preparation time: 5 minutes
>
><Applause> Nice solution, Robert. Now spend another five minutes reading
the
>statement of the problem, which explains why the above is useless... :-)
It has already been said, elsewhere, something about how those with only a
hammer see all problems as nails... I recall something like this happening
a few years back, where I posted a problem and received a response of 'All
ya gotta do is issue an SQL query like...', hence my attempt to avoid such
this time by the parenthetic note above.
Shows how well *that* worked, yep.
DD
|
