Re: Wrong result with constant quals
От | Vik Fearing |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Wrong result with constant quals |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 309137b4-9b48-5952-c6e1-0fa7007d0419@postgresfriends.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Wrong result with constant quals (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Wrong result with constant quals
Re: Wrong result with constant quals |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 11/4/22 00:36, Tom Lane wrote: > Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org> writes: >> The following query returns a wrong result, in my opinion. > >> postgres=# select 1 where false having true; >> ?column? >> ---------- >> 1 >> (1 row) > >> The correct result should be zero rows. > > No, I don't think so. The presence of HAVING without GROUP BY makes > this act like a query with an aggregate function and no GROUP BY: you > get a single grouped row, regardless of what the input is. There's a > reasonably clear specification of that in SQL92 7.8 <having clause>: SQL92? wut? > 1) Let T be the result of the preceding <from clause>, <where > clause>, or <group by clause>. If that clause is not a <group > by clause>, then T consists of a single group and does not have > a grouping column. > > "A single group" is not "no groups". > > Later SQL versions define this by reference to "GROUP BY ()", but > I think the effect is the same. I allowed for this by saying it could be a single group with no rows if you preferred to look at it that way. This does not explain why the WHERE FALSE is being ignored and producing rows. -- Vik Fearing
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: