From: | David Walker <pgsql(at)grax(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Attribute must be GROUPed.... ? |
Date: | 2003-05-01 18:20:57 |
Message-ID: | 200305011320.57112@grx |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I use min(fieldname) as fieldname which is a little more than I want to type
but doesn't disturb my groupings.
On Wednesday 30 April 2003 05:02 pm, Daniele Orlandi wrote:
> Stephan Szabo wrote:
> > AFAIK it's a requirement of the SQL spec. (SQL92(draft) 7.9 SR 7, "each
> > <column reference> in each <value expression> that references a column
> > of T shall reference a grouping column or be specified within a <set
> > function specification>."
>
> I see... How should the "shall" term be considered ? I don't have much
> knowledge of the SQL specs language.
>
> How other DBMS behave in this case ? I know that mysql doesn't enforce
> this requirement but... mysql is not a perfect reference wrt standards
> compliance.
>
> > Well, it'd mean you didn't have to put the extra columns in the group by
> > list to make them grouping columns.
>
> This is what I currently do as a workaround, but it's not much clean
> expecially when you have many ungrouped fields in the target list.
>
> Bye!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-05-02 02:20:34 | ECPG timestamp.c |
Previous Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-05-01 17:59:00 | Re: Should we SetQuerySnapshot() between actions of a rule? |