Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kevin Brown
Тема Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY
Дата
Msg-id 20050310033008.GC30977@filer
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP  (Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> What that means is that neither the HAVING clause nor the targetlist
> can use any ungrouped columns except within aggregate calls; that is,
> 
>     select col from tab having 2>1
> 
> is in fact illegal per SQL spec, because col isn't a grouping column
> (there are no grouping columns in this query).

[...]

> Comments?  Can anyone confirm whether DB2 or other databases allow
> ungrouped column references with HAVING?


Oracle does not allow such references.  It issues "ORA-00979: not a
GROUP BY expression" when you try to hand it such a reference.

MS SQL Server does not allow such references either, yielding
"columnname is invalid in the HAVING clause because it is not
contained in either an aggregate function or the GROUP BY clause.".

Can't comment about DB2.


-- 
Kevin Brown                          kevin@sysexperts.com


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Jeff Hoffmann
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pgpool question
Следующее
От: Greg Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: We are not following the spec for HAVING without GROUP BY