> On a separate note, should we support HAVING without any aggregates?
Sure, it is allowed by the SQL92 spec (as are various other
combinations with and without GROUP and HAVING). But it adds no real
functionality, and this is the first report of anyone even trying it,
since the same behavior is covered by simpler, more common queries.
Doesn't seem to be a high priority...
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California