Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #5898: Nested "in" clauses hide bad column names

From: Scott Dunbar <scott(at)xigole(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #5898: Nested "in" clauses hide bad column names
Date: 2011-02-22 18:07:39
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Yes, you're correct.  I guess this makes sense but it does seem strange 
that I can enter garbage in a query but it still runs.  And in my case 
the output from this (the entire table) was then used in a delete 
statement that toasted the entire table.  Allowing bogus SQL just seems 
"wrong" but I do understand what's going on.

Thanks for your help.

On 02/22/2011 10:45 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Scott Dunbar"<scott(at)xigole(dot)com>  writes:
>> I have a nested in clause like:
>> select respondent_id from respondent where respondent_id in (select
>> respondent_id from chat_session where project_id in (select project_id from
>> project where company_id = 4));
>> However, in this example, there is no column named respondent_id in the
>> chat_session table.
> Probably there is one in respondent, though?  This behavior is not a bug
> --- what you have there is an outer reference, and it is working exactly
> as specified by the SQL standard.  Sub-selects would be a whole lot less
> useful if they couldn't refer to variables of the outer query.
> 			regards, tom lane

Scott Dunbar
Xigole Systems, Inc.
Enterprise software consulting, development, and hosting

In response to


pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Daniel FarinaDate: 2011-02-22 18:32:53
Subject: Re: Re: 8.3.5: Types with typnamespace pointing at non-existent pg_namespace oid
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2011-02-22 17:45:03
Subject: Re: BUG #5898: Nested "in" clauses hide bad column names

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group