Thread: UNION problem
I have the following two separate QL queires which work fine alone. But if I tried and UNION them I get an error which doesn't seem to make sense, "Attribute not found ...". Can someone spot and point out out my mistake/error? Query 1: SELECT prod_id FROM invoice_li, products, movies WHERE prod_id=products.id AND movies.id=products.id AND received AND ship_now AND not cancelled AND invoice_id not in (select id from invoices where cancelled); Query 2: SELECT prod_id FROM invoice_li, products, movies WHERE invoice_id not in (select invoice_id from invoice_li where cancelled OR not received OR shipped) AND prod_id=products.id AND movies.id=products.id AND received AND ship_now AND not cancelled GROUP BY prod_id, prod_type_id, maker_id, maker_prod_code, label_id ORDER BY prod_type_id, maker_id, maker_prod_code, label_id; UNION: TAL=# SELECT prod_id FROM invoice_li, products, movies WHERE prod_id=products.id AND movies.id=products.id AND received AND ship_now AND not cancelled AND invoice_id not in (select id from invoices where cancelled) UNION SELECT prod_id FROM invoice_li, products, movies WHERE invoice_id not in (select invoice_id from invoice_li where cancelled OR not received OR shipped) AND prod_id=products.id AND movies.id=products.id AND received AND ship_now AND not cancelled GROUP BY prod_id, prod_type_id, maker_id, maker_prod_code, label_id ORDER BY prod_type_id, maker_id, maker_prod_code, label_id TAL-# ; ERROR: Attribute "prod_type_id" not found Thanks! Jc
On Tuesday 04 Feb 2003 6:08 am, Jean-Christian Imbeault wrote: > I have the following two separate QL queires which work fine alone. But > if I tried and UNION them I get an error which doesn't seem to make > sense, "Attribute not found ...". Can someone spot and point out out my > mistake/error? > TAL=# SELECT prod_id FROM invoice_li, products, movies WHERE > prod_id=products.id AND movies.id=products.id AND received AND ship_now > AND not cancelled AND invoice_id not in (select id from invoices where > cancelled) UNION SELECT prod_id FROM invoice_li, products, movies WHERE > invoice_id not in (select invoice_id from invoice_li where cancelled OR > not received OR shipped) AND prod_id=products.id AND > movies.id=products.id AND received AND ship_now AND not cancelled GROUP > BY prod_id, prod_type_id, maker_id, maker_prod_code, label_id ORDER BY > prod_type_id, maker_id, maker_prod_code, label_id > TAL-# ; > ERROR: Attribute "prod_type_id" not found Since the two queries work separately, I'd guess PG is trying to locate prod_type_id via a different route when unioned. What happens if you qualify all the column-names? Something like: select min(f.a) from foo f group by f.b UNION select min(f2.a) FROM foo f2 group by f2.b; -- Richard Huxton
Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com> writes: > Since the two queries work separately, I'd guess PG is trying to locate > prod_type_id via a different route when unioned. What happens if you qualify > all the column-names? ORDER BY applied to a UNION result can only order by the column names visible in the UNION result. Consider for example SELECT x1 AS a FROM foo UNION SELECT y1 AS a FROM bar ORDER BY ??? where foo and bar have no column names in common. The *only* thing that's sensible to order by is "a" --- and no qualification, mind you. Anything else you might try to order by is not available in one or the other arm of the UNION. The SQL92 spec is very rigid about this, and so is Postgres. You could imagine ordering by, say, UPPER(a), but we don't support that extension at present (unlike the situation for ORDER BY in non-UNION queries, where we're quite lax). regards, tom lane