AND OR gives me 46.

Guetierrez: Xgc: looks the same as my output?

Rowlison: BlaDe; I thought you did not like that result?

Maritato: BlaDe: Back up a little. Remove the order adjustment in the left panel. Debug the select first.

Althaus: Xgc: the result is fine except it has skipped 2

Sanfilippo: BlaDe: You need to debug the left hand panel. You can’t do that practically after it’s done.

Ganesh: BlaDe: Are you saying you didn’t ask a new question?

Lederman: Xgc: well I mean I fixed the original bug with your help adding the subselect

Atherton: Now i’m asking why it starts from 3 in sort and leaves out 2

Deveja: BlaDe: That’s easy. Look at the result before and after each operation in the left panel that touches sort.

Molinaro: BlaDe: You can easily do that by creating a new table to hold each result: CREATE TABLE t1 SELECT .; stuff . CREATE TABLE t2 SELECT .;

Njie: BlaDe: Now in the right hand panel, select from each of those tables.

Palms: BlaDe: Did you do that? Do you see the issue now?

Macksoud: BlaDe: Do you want another hint?

Brune: BlaDe: Progress? It’s a simple issue.

Terp: Xgc: sorry had to jump on a call

Behne: Xgc: before I do, is this the way you’d recommend going? is there a better way entirely?

Casement: I just want reordering of items in a list, basically

Romagnoli: I fear it could become inefficient with a large # of rows

Rojo: BlaDe: I think addressing your current approach is fine for now. We can discuss alternatives later.

Semke: BlaDe: It’s somewhat unusual to keep updating a table to fix an order column. But that is certainly one way to do it.

Hrobsky: Xgc:!9/d155dc/2

Lenyard: Xgc: just duplicating it, for some reason 2 is skipped but 3 isn’t = with a0 based index the same happens:!9/7969b/1

Mcgonigal: BlaDe: The same mistake. Review this fix:!9/8d4e2/1

Leonette: You made the mistake in both inserts.

Mister: Sorry. That was the mistake.

Ketchem: Hey I’m having trouble filtering on joins. I’m not sure I’m doing this the right way

Bibee: Don’t mean to have a full on solution, but would like some pointers on how to properly tackle this what’s expected and what is actually returned in the pastebin

Brittman: And tt.taxonomy LIKE ‘author’ AND LIKE ‘%name%’ or tt.taxonomy LIKE ‘portal’ AND LIKE ‘%portal%’

Brittman: You also want an ORDER BY and LIMIT generally

Brittman: You want to avoid LIKE ‘%foo’

Payna: Brittman indeed it’s just for testing purposes

Sumpter: Plauclair: The intersection of the results is all you get. If the results do not intersect, you get 0 rows.

Ploss: Plauclair: AND is like an intersection. Each row must match both terms to be in the result.

Grave: Xgc: it’s my understanding that they do, which is why I don’t get it

Stritzke: Plauclair: Except the result is correct.

Plassmann: Wait. when I put an OR there are actually 132 rows returned

Nemecek: Plauclair:, with data that shows the behavior. It’ll be obviousl to anyone who tries to help.

Kusnic: Plauclair: You’re confused by what x AND y OR z means.

Fedak: Plauclair: Remember, you have 3 terms in the WHERE clause.

Delarosa: Plauclair: You probably wanted: WHERE x AND y OR z

Lunde: Plauclair: For your last test, that is.

Turvey: Plauclair: If you’re using comma separated lists in those columns, that’s a bad sign.

Aldas: No they’re all strings and fixed values

Ero: I wouldn’t dare doing this

Brookhouse: AND OR gives me 46 results