Consoldate the following two sql commands into one sql command

[worchyld]

Okay, well I've tried the GROUP BY, it almost works.

I've added a DISTINCT command to prevent duplication of rows being outputted;

(tie this to the top of your code):

select distinct

and following your idea, I added a GROUP BY command to the bottom of the code.

(tie this to the bottom of your code):

	    GROUP BY 
		t1.user_id_2";

This groups data how you want it. But my output is incorrect, and I think it must have something to do with the big SQL command you wrote.

As you can see, it groups the data, but it's outputting somebody who shouldn't be there.. Alice.

quickMale is matched with sarah

quickMale is matched with Olga

quickMale is matched with Charlie

quickMale is matched with Oisan

quickMale is matched with helen

quickMale is matched with Jenni

quickMale is matched with Alice

quickMale is matched with Noella

quickMale is matched with Emma

quickMale is matched with Lillie

Alice is matched with quickMale

quickMale is matched with quickFemale

There's a problem using GROUP BY anyway.

Because I've used GROUP BY on user_id_2, it'll filter out everybody else.

This means I cannot email anybody else in this loop other than, in this example, quickMale.

Surely there must be a way of acheiving this.

I've been thinking about creating a temporary table which all the output from your super sql command is placed.

Then we can use another query to find all distinct occurances of user_id_1 and output his/her matches.

Would that work? How do you suggest solving this?

[r937]

if you added a GROUP BY to my query, and then a DISTINCT, then you didn't understand what i've been trying to tell you

the query is supposed to return results that look like this -

userA user2
userA user3
userA user4
userA user6
userA user8
userB user7
userB user9
userC user12
userD user21
userD user22

you then have to process this in an output loop in your scripting language

[worchyld]

Oh, my mistake, I'm sorry.

I'm going to start again with your original code and see if I can get a work-around.

Many thanks for putting up with me.