| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: HAVING <alias> ... |
| Date: | 2005-04-20 15:10:41 |
| Message-ID: | 20050420121008.Y76866@ganymede.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>> Is there a reason (other then it hasn't been implemented yet?) that the
>> following couldn't work?
>
>> SELECT id,count(id) AS cnt
>> FROM table
>> WHERE id IN ( 1,2,3,4,5)
>> GROUP BY id
>> HAVING cnt = 2;
>
> It's contrary to the SQL spec, for one thing ...
Of course it is *sigh*
Thanks ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-04-20 15:18:10 | Re: inet increment w/ int8 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-04-20 14:41:46 | Re: Foreign keys on array elements |