Re: Debugging postmaster to fix possible bug in Postgres? Followup

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com>
Cc: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Debugging postmaster to fix possible bug in Postgres? Followup
Date: 2003-02-13 23:48:29
Message-ID: 2032.1045180109@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-sql

Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com> writes:
> Then it looks like postgres behaviour is still not compliant, if I read it correctly, because
> select x from mytable order by y;
> should be invalid according to this, but works just fine in postres.

Yup, it's an extension --- as indeed is pointed out at the bottom of our
SELECT reference page. But it's a well-defined extension, because every
row of the result does have a clearly associated value of y. Once you
throw in GROUP BY or aggregates, you can't order by values that aren't
constrained by the grouping.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-02-14 00:06:29 Re: SQL Functions vs PL/PgSQL
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-02-13 23:06:27 Re: Extending Datatype