| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Lew <noone(at)lwsc(dot)ehost-services(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: GROUP BY column alias? |
| Date: | 2010-02-19 19:24:38 |
| Message-ID: | 7803.1266607478@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:07:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> SQL:1999 and later use a slightly different definition which is not
>> entirely upward compatible with SQL-92. In most cases, however,
>> PostgreSQL will interpret an ORDER BY or GROUP BY expression the
>> same way SQL:1999 does.
> The current SQL standard *supersedes* all previous ones.
That is the opinion of the SQL committee, all right, but it has got
precious little to do with the real world.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-02-19 19:35:26 | Re: Possible causes for database corruption and solutions |
| Previous Message | WordStream | 2010-02-19 19:23:08 | Sr. Linux Systems Architect - CentOS, PostgresSQL/pgPool-II, Apache Server, Python, Bacula |