Re: NOT HAVING clause? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Alban Hertroys
Subject Re: NOT HAVING clause?
Date
Msg-id 43D75DB0.4030108@magproductions.nl
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: NOT HAVING clause?  (Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews@supernews.com>)
List pgsql-general
Andrew - Supernews wrote:
> On 2006-01-24, Will Glynn <wglynn@freedomhealthcare.org> wrote:
>
>>You might try:
>>
>>SELECT some_column
>>  FROM some_table
>>  GROUP BY some_column
>>  HAVING SUM(CASE WHEN sort_order=1 THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) = 0;
>
>
> SELECT some_column
>   FROM some_table
>  GROUP BY some_column
> HAVING every(sort_order <> 1);
>
> every() is in 8.1 at least (can't recall when it was introduced); it's the
> same as bool_and(), i.e. an aggregate that returns true only if all inputs
> are true. Why isn't there a corresponding any(), I wonder? (bool_or does
> exist)

Unfortunately we still use 7.4, but I realized this morning that this
should work too (not tried yet):

SELECT some_column
   FROM some_table
  GROUP BY some_column
HAVING MIN(sort_order) > 1;

As our sort_orders start from 1.

--
Alban Hertroys
alban@magproductions.nl

magproductions b.v.

T: ++31(0)534346874
F: ++31(0)534346876
M:
I: www.magproductions.nl
A: Postbus 416
    7500 AK Enschede

//Showing your Vision to the World//

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Devrim GUNDUZ
Date:
Subject: Re: Please, help! About database cluster and adding to
Next
From: James Croft
Date:
Subject: Temporary table visibility