On 7 February 2016 at 23:21, Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> wrote:
> I think for now the following patch is best. This preserves the ability
> to push degenerate HAVING clauses through an explicit GROUP BY () as
> well as an implicit one, but prevents pushdown in all other cases.
>
> Includes comment and regression test.
>
Yes, I think that's probably the best solution for now. Longer term I
think it might be possible to do better, along the lines discussed
above, but I haven't had time to explore any of those options.
Note that with this change to the "if" condition, the next "else if"
condition can be simplified back to just:
else if (parse->groupClause)
{
/* move it to WHERE */
...
Andres, are you going to take this one?
Regards,
Dean