Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Peripheral Links

Header And Logo

PostgreSQL
| The world's most advanced open source database.

Site Navigation

Search archives
  Advanced Search

Re: RE: [SQL] Why *no* ambig.uous complain in select part?


  • From: Emi Lu <emilu(at)encs(dot)concordia(dot)ca>
  • To: "Edward W. Rouse" <erouse(at)comsquared(dot)com>
  • Cc: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
  • Subject: Re: RE: [SQL] Why *no* ambig.uous complain in select part?
  • Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:48:42 -0400
  • Message-id: <48AF262A.7030506@encs.concordia.ca> <text/plain>

Hi Edward,

Just a guess, but it seems to me that since the join is using col1 and col2
there is no ambiguity. They should be the same no matter which table it
comes from.

Not always the same; "Left join" may return:

table2.col1,col2 = null,
while table1.col1,col2 is not null




-----Original Message-----
From: pgsql-sql-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org [mailto:pgsql-sql-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]
On Behalf Of Emi Lu
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 4:12 PM
To: pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: [SQL] Why *no* ambig.uous complain in select part?

Good morning,

Just notice one small thing, and need your information about select

select col1, col2
from table1
left join table2
using (col1, col2)

;

This query never complain about ambiguous columns of col1 and col2 in the select part.

My guess is:
(1) col1, col2 always return table1.col1, table1.col2
(2) because using (col1, col2)
     that's why, table name is not necessary in select part

Am I wrong? Please advise?

Thank you!








Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996 – 2012 PostgreSQL Global Development Group