AW: [HACKERS] SELECT ... AS ... names in WHERE/GROUP BY/HAVING

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Ansley, Michael'" <Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org '" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: AW: [HACKERS] SELECT ... AS ... names in WHERE/GROUP BY/HAVING
Date: 1999-12-16 16:22:54
Message-ID: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C603FDC1D1@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> So, according to Oracle's view of the world, HAVING is orrect
> because it
> rejects aliases, but GROUP BY is broken because it accepts them.

Just because it is more powerful than the standard does not mean it is
broken.
The only thing, that is broken is that the alias is taken before the
colname,
and thus results in wrong output for a standard conformant query.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jose Soares 1999-12-16 16:27:34 \copy problem
Previous Message Nicolas Nappe 1999-12-16 15:55:03 access control lists ( acl )