Re: [HACKERS] Sugerencia de opcion

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Informatica-Cooperativa Cnel(dot) Oviedo" <informatica(at)coopovie(dot)com(dot)py>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Sugerencia de opcion
Date: 2010-01-24 14:54:21
Message-ID: 603c8f071001240654t11884cc0kae1f0d1907c63e38@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers

2009/1/22 Informatica-Cooperativa Cnel. Oviedo <informatica(at)coopovie(dot)com(dot)py>:
> Buenos Dias todos,
>
>                             Soy un usuario de postgres de Paraguay, consulto
> sobre la posibilidad de inclucion en la futura version la siguiente
> sentencia(Uso de alias en la condicion HAVING ):
>
>
>     SELECT id, sum(salario) as SumaSalario
>     FROM salarios
>     GROUP BY id
>     HAVING SumaSalario>500;

I've wished for that syntax once or twice myself, but I'm assuming
there's a reason we haven't implemented it? Part of the problem is
it's inheritantly ambiguous if salarios happens to contain a column
called sumasalario, which is a problem that seems to arise for me
fairly regularly in practice. Still, it would be nice for WHERE/GROUP
BY/HAVING clauses to have an explicit way to reference "the target
list column called foo".

...Robert

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2010-01-24 15:02:47 Re: Self-referential records
Previous Message Andreas Kretschmer 2010-01-24 14:51:14 Re: Self-referential records

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2010-01-24 15:18:14 Re: commit fests
Previous Message Teodor Sigaev 2010-01-24 14:43:42 Re: Red-black tree for GIN