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. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])