Re: [HACKERS] HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jose' Soares Da Silva
Subject Re: [HACKERS] HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.3.96.980416154122.1086A-100000@proxy.bazzanese.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 15 Apr 1998, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Attached is a list of bug reports for the HAVING clause.
>
> My question is, "Do we disable the HAVING clause for 6.3.2?"  The bugs
> are serious and cause crashes.
>
> I have looked at the issues, and the basic problems are that the
> aggregate logic expects to be attached to an actual field in the target
> list, and the HAVING clause does not properly handle non-aggregate
> retrictions, nor does it prevent them.  COUNT(*) uses the oid of the
> first FROM table, so that is a problem too.
>
> I have looked at the code, but don't have time to fix it before Friday,
> and holding up the release for that would be silly.  I don't think there
> is one thing wrong, but several places that have to be change to get
> this working solidly.
>
> Do we disable it?
>
Don't do that. If you disable it, we can't help you to correct bugs ?
                                                        Jose'


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Thomas G. Lockhart"
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release
Next
From: The Hermit Hacker
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] HAVING clause and 6.3.2 release