From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)coretech(dot)co(dot)nz> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP |
Date: | 2005-03-10 21:37:13 |
Message-ID: | 4230BE09.9070305@coretech.co.nz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Would those of you with access to other DBMSes try this:
>
> create table tab (col integer);
> select 1 from tab having 1=0;
> select 1 from tab having 1=1;
> insert into tab values(1);
> insert into tab values(2);
> select 1 from tab having 1=0;
> select 1 from tab having 1=1;
>
> I claim that a SQL-conformant database will return 0, 1, 0, and 1 rows
> from the 4 selects --- that is, the contents of tab make no difference
> at all. (MySQL returns 0, 0, 0, and 2 rows, so they are definitely
> copying our mistake...)
Firebird 1.5.1 FreeBSD 5.3
Database: test
SQL> drop table tab;
SQL> create table tab (col integer);
SQL> select 1 from tab having 1=0;
SQL> select 1 from tab having 1=1;
============
1
SQL> insert into tab values(1);
SQL> insert into tab values(2);
SQL> select 1 from tab having 1=0;
SQL> select 1 from tab having 1=1;
============
1
SQL>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Shewmaker | 2005-03-10 22:42:07 | Re: [HACKERS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY |
Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2005-03-10 20:14:23 | Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Shewmaker | 2005-03-10 22:42:07 | Re: [HACKERS] We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY |
Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2005-03-10 21:28:06 | Re: Raw size |