Re: [HACKERS] HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release

On Wed, 15 Apr 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Attached is a list of bug reports for the HAVING clause.
>
> My question is, "Do we disable the HAVING clause for 6.3.2?" The bugs
> are serious and cause crashes.
>
> I have looked at the issues, and the basic problems are that the
> aggregate logic expects to be attached to an actual field in the target
> list, and the HAVING clause does not properly handle non-aggregate
> retrictions, nor does it prevent them. COUNT(*) uses the oid of the
> first FROM table, so that is a problem too.
>
> I have looked at the code, but don't have time to fix it before Friday,
> and holding up the release for that would be silly. I don't think there
> is one thing wrong, but several places that have to be change to get
> this working solidly.
>
> Do we disable it?

Yes...but disabling means that it *will not* be available until
v6.4...no v6.3.3 :)

Marc G. Fournier
Systems Administrator @ hub.org
primary: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org secondary: scrappy(at){freebsd|postgresql}.org