On 8/23/06, Andrew McCollum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I find this feature useful, especially in queries which use aggregate
functions, such as the following:
SELECT sum(a) FROM tbl GROUP BY b
The question should be what the compelling reason is to remove a useful
feature.
Of course it's OK
> The question should be what the compelling reason is to remove a useful
> feature.
... And *that* is exactly why Windows will always be full of security holes.
I thought it was because it used the network for inter process communications
(thus allowing external processes to attack it)
--
--- Kurt Welgehausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > select a from qqq group by b;
>
> This question was discussed on the list a year or 2 ago.
>
> The column a in the simple query above is meaningless; it's
> an arbitrary value from each group. There are queries,
> however, where a non-grouped
On 8/23/06, Andrew McCollum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I find this feature useful, especially in queries which use aggregate
functions, such as the following:
SELECT sum(a) FROM tbl GROUP BY b
The question should be what the compelling reason is to remove a useful
feature.
... And *that* is
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 7:02 AM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Seems like a bug in the parser
> select a from qqq group by b;
This question was discussed on the list a year or 2 ago.
The column a in the simple query above is meaningl
> select a from qqq group by b;
This question was discussed on the list a year or 2 ago.
The column a in the simple query above is meaningless; it's
an arbitrary value from each group. There are queries,
however, where a non-grouped column is meaningful, such as
a join where the grouping column
Joe Wilson wrote:
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
SQLite accepts the above and does the right thing with it.
It is the equivalent of saying:
SELECT a FROM (SELECT a,b FROM qqq GROUP BY b);
Not sure what you mean by the "right thing". It's not obvious
why the rows returned by this GROUP BY
On 8/22/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SQLite accepts the above and does the right thing with it.
It is the equivalent of saying:
SELECT a FROM (SELECT a,b FROM qqq GROUP BY b);
The subquery here doesn't make any sense to me. How a single 'a' is
chosen for the grouped
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Alexei Alexandrov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I noticed something like a bug in the SQLite parser: queries with
> > "group by" expression should accept only fields listed in the "group
> > by" clause or aggregated fields (with sum(), max() etc). For example,
> >
"Alexei Alexandrov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I noticed something like a bug in the SQLite parser: queries with
> "group by" expression should accept only fields listed in the "group
> by" clause or aggregated fields (with sum(), max() etc). For example,
> given the table
>
> create table qqq
I noticed something like a bug in the SQLite parser: queries with
"group by" expression should accept only fields listed in the "group
by" clause or aggregated fields (with sum(), max() etc). For example,
given the table
create table qqq (a text, b integer);
the following query should not be
11 matches
Mail list logo
