From: | "Damond Walker" <dwalker(at)black-oak(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <owner-pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Cc: | <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] distinct. Is this the correct behaviour? |
Date: | 1999-10-21 16:57:16 |
Message-ID: | 00ef01bf1be5$567e4600$af63a8c0@walkers.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
----- Original Message -----
> Hmph, so sybase hasn't thought through the implications of ORDER BY on
> a hidden column vs. DISTINCT either. Can anyone try it on some other
> DBMSes?
>
Using the following script...
create table t1(f1 int, f2 int);
insert into t1(f1, f2) values(1,1);
insert into t1(f1, f2) values(1,2);
insert into t1(f1, f2) values(1,3);
insert into t1(f1, f2) values(2,4);
select distinct f1 from t1 order by f2;
Returned the following message under Oracle8 on NT:
ORA-01791: not a SELECTed expression
Returned the following message under MS SQL Server 7.0:
ORDER BY items must appear in the select list if SELECT DISTINCT is
specified.
I could try it on Oracle8i but I suspect the result will be the same.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-10-21 16:58:32 | Re: [HACKERS] distinct. Is this the correct behaviour? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-10-21 16:55:56 | Re: [DOCS] Re: [HACKERS] Outline for PostgreSQL book |