From: | jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) |
---|---|
To: | maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian) |
Cc: | tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 TODO list |
Date: | 1999-05-11 13:20:32 |
Message-ID: | m10hCSW-000EBXC@orion.SAPserv.Hamburg.dsh.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > GROUP BY can reference columns not in target list
> >
> > What's wrong with that?
>
> Is that not a problem. What possible use would GROUP BY on columns not
> in target list be of use. Maybe it is. I remember someone asking for
> something like this. I will remove the item unless someone complains.
> I thought you were the one complaining about it.
This can happen if the GROUP BY clause is coming from a view,
but the grouping columns of the view aren't in the
targetlist.
Usually the view's grouping is required because of use of
aggregates in the view, so omitting them isn't a good idea.
I'm actually testing what happens if I use junk TLE's for
rule generated GROUP BY entries...
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#======================================== jwieck(at)debis(dot)com (Jan Wieck) #
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 1999-05-11 13:54:04 | Re: [HACKERS] 6.5 TODO list |
Previous Message | ZEUGSWETTER Andreas IZ5 | 1999-05-11 12:08:37 | AW: AW: [HACKERS] misc and triggers regression tests failed on 6. 5bet a1 |