Re: "for SELECT DISTINCT, ORDER BY expressions must appear in select list" - is that the standart or a limitation of postgresql?

[Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>]

Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net> writes:
> On Feb 15, 2007, at 22:35 , Richard Huxton wrote:
>> Walter Cruz wrote:
>>> The error: ERROR:  for SELECT DISTINCT, ORDER BY expressions must
>>> appear in select list is due to a standart implementarion or a design
>>> decision of postgres?
>> 
>> I think ORDER BY is defined to take place after DISTINCT, which  
>> means there is no meaningful "number" for it to order by. You could  
>> arbitrarily choose the first number encountered, but I can't see  
>> what sense it would make to order by them.

> I believe the reason is that DISTINCT depends on a sort to determine  
> uniqueness (distinctness), so it's a implementation detail that if  
> you're going to include an ORDER BY, you also need to include the  
> same columns in the ORDER BY in the DISTINCT clause.

No, there's actually a definitional reason for it.  Consider

	SELECT DISTINCT x FROM tab ORDER BY y;

For any particular x-value in the table there might be many different y
values.  Which one will you use to sort that x-value in the output?

Back in SQL92 they avoided this problem by specifying that ORDER BY
entries had to reference output columns.  SQL99 has some messy verbiage
that I think comes out at the same place as our restriction:

                   A) If K(i) is not equivalent to a <value expression>
                      immediately contained in any <derived column> in the
                      <select list> SL of <query specification> QS contained
                      in QE, then:

                      I) T shall not be a grouped table.

                     II) QS shall not specify the <set quantifier> DISTINCT
                        or directly contain one or more <set function
                        specification>s.


			regards, tom lane