Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP
Date: 2005-03-10 04:44:55
Message-ID: 11032.1110429895@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers

Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>>> Comments? Can anyone confirm whether DB2 or other databases allow
>>> ungrouped column references with HAVING?

> MySQL allows it:

A slightly tighter experiment shows that they treat HAVING like WHERE
in this case:

mysql> create table tab(col int);
Query OK, 0 rows affected (0.00 sec)

mysql> insert into tab values(1);
Query OK, 1 row affected (0.00 sec)

mysql> insert into tab values(2);
Query OK, 1 row affected (0.01 sec)

mysql> select col from tab having col>1;
+------+
| col |
+------+
| 2 |
+------+
1 row in set (0.00 sec)

I think it's fairly likely that they copied our misinterpretation ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-03-10 05:06:24 Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY
Previous Message Christopher Kings-Lynne 2005-03-10 04:00:26 Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-03-10 05:06:24 Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY
Previous Message Oleg Bartunov 2005-03-10 04:43:18 Re: pgpool question