Re: [HACKERS] error on HAVING clause

Question is, if we can't get it fixed completely, does it work well
enough for us to keep it in 6.3.2?

>
> On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> Don't worry about time Bruce. I'm not in a hurry.
> HAVING is an important feature. Finally SELECT statement is complete.
> I would like to show you another thing about HAVING.
>
> prova=> select sno,qty  from sp  group by sno,qty having qty = 300;
> sno  |qty
> -----+---
> S1   |100
> S1   |200
> S1   |300
> S1   |400
> S2   |300
> S2   |400
> S3   |200
> S4   |200
> S4   |300
> S4   |400
> (10 rows)
>
> prova=> select oid,sno,qty  from sp  group by sno,qty having qty = 300;
>    oid|sno  |qty
> ------+-----+---
> 147004|S1   |100
> 147001|S1   |200
> 147000|S1   |300
> 147002|S1   |400
> 147006|S2   |300
> 147007|S2   |400
> 147008|S3   |200
> 147009|S4   |200
> 147010|S4   |300
> 147011|S4   |400
> (10 rows)
>
> Solid give me another result. Who are rigth ?
>
> SOLID SQL Editor (teletype) v.02.20.0007
> select sno,qty  from sp  group by sno,qty having qty = 300;
> SNO                          QTY
> ---                          ---
> S1                           300.
> S2                           300.
> S4                           300.
> 3 rows fetched.
>
> Maybe this one is illegal, but it give me a strange output:
>
> prova=> select oid,sno,qty  from sp  having qty = 300;
>       |     |               <---------where is the title  ????
> ------+-----+---
> 147000|S1   |300
> 147001|S1   |200
> 147002|S1   |400
> 147003|S1   |200
> 147004|S1   |100
> 147005|S1   |100
> 147006|S2   |300
> 147007|S2   |400
> 147008|S3   |200
> 147009|S4   |200
> 147010|S4   |300
> 147011|S4   |400
> (12 rows)
>                                               Jose'
>
>


--
Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)