Tom,
> No, because it's not a bug. The SELECT list is evaluated after HAVING,
> so what you are asking for is an impossibility in the SQL semantic
> model.
>=20
> (Yeah, I know there's some laxity in GROUP BY ... one of our worse
> mistakes IMHO ...)
Oh. I see what you mean. Given that I (along with at least a dozen poste=
rs=20
to the SQL list) was confused that our HAVING/ORDER BY will accept column=
=20
aliases but not sub-select aliases, would this be worthy of a FAQ item?
--=20
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
