On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Rosser Schwarz wrote:
> A colleague has the following query, which errors with: relation "dl"
> does not exist. (See the second item in the FROM clause.) If that
> item is moved to immediately precede the first JOIN item however, the
> query works as expected.
>
> select u.usersfirstname || ' ' || u.userslastname as userssupervisorsname
> , l.locationsname || ' >> ' || lv.listvaluesname as locationdepartment
> , lvcat.listvaluesname as usersemploymentcategory
> , lvclass.listvaluesname as usersemploymentclass
> , lvacdcat.listcategoriesname as usersacdcategory
> from intranet.tbl_users u
> , intranet.tbl_departmentslocations dl
> , intranet.tbl_listvalues lvcat
> , intranet.tbl_listvalues lvclass
> , intranet.tbl_listcategories lvacdcat
> join intranet.tbl_listvalues lv on dl.listvaluesid = lv.listvaluesid
> join intranet.tbl_locations l on dl.locationsid = l.locationsid
> where u.usersid = 199
> and dl.listvaluesid = 13
> and lvcat.listvaluesid = 23
> and lvclass.listvaluesid = 27
> and lvacdcat.listcategoriesid = 6
>
> This strikes me as a bug. Is it known behavior? A quick search
> doesn't turn up much, but that may be a weakness in my google-fu.
SQL seems to say that join binds more tightly than commas, so I don't
believe dl is in scope for either of those ON clauses in the explicit join
syntax.
