Hi, Tom,
Tom Lane wrote:
If film_id is a primary key for film, then it's actually legal per SQL99
(though not in earlier SQL specs) to just GROUP BY film_id and then
reference the other columns of film without explicit grouping, because
clearly there can be only one value of them per film_id
Hi all. I'm with a little doubt.I'm testing the pagila (the postgres port of mysql sakila sample).Well, I was trying to translate the query:select film.film_id AS FID, film.title
AS title, film.description AS description, category.name AS category, film.rental_rate AS price,
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 10:31:48AM -0300, Walter Cruz wrote:
ERROR: column film.description must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be
used in an aggregate function
If I put that column on GROUP BY everything works ok. But I want understant
why do I need to do that. Can someone teach me,
So I can assume that the MySQL implementation is strange? (It accepts that kind of query)[]'s- WalterOn 9/1/06, Andrew Sullivan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 10:31:48AM -0300, Walter Cruz wrote:
ERROR:column film.description must appear in the GROUP BY clause or be used in an
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:26:39PM -0300, Walter Cruz wrote:
So I can assume that the MySQL implementation is strange? (It accepts that
kind of query)
In my experience, it is almost never safe to assume that the MySQL
approach to SQL bears anything but a passing resemblance to SQL
proper. This
But, when I add another column on select, like, film_description, I get
the following error:
ERROR: column film.description must appear in the GROUP BY clause or
be used in an aggregate function
If I put that column on GROUP BY everything works ok. But I want
understant why do I need to
On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 12:26, Walter Cruz wrote:
So I can assume that the MySQL implementation is strange? (It accepts
that kind of query)
Yes, according to the SQL spec, you should generally get an error when
you run a query like this:
select field1, field2 from table group by field1
since
Andrew Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:26:39PM -0300, Walter Cruz wrote:
So I can assume that the MySQL implementation is strange? (It accepts that
kind of query)
In my experience, it is almost never safe to assume that the MySQL
approach to SQL bears anything
So I can assume that the MySQL implementation is strange? (It accepts
that kind of query)
Yes, MySQL behaves strangely in this case (as well as in several other
cases). I wouldn't rely on this as it probably can choose different
values each time (although as far as I remember I haven't seen
Thank you all.I found myself with the same trouble in last week, when I tried to port mambo CMS to PostgreSQL.After some work, In fall i a query like the one that was quoted by Andrew and decided to stop.
In that time, my guess wae that something was wrong with MySQL.(I don't know.. I have seen
On Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Walter Cruz wrote:
Hi all. I'm with a little doubt.
I'm testing the pagila (the postgres port of mysql sakila sample).
Well, I was trying to translate the query:
select
film.film_id AS FID,
film.title AS title,
film.description AS description,
11 matches
Mail list logo
