Thanks for the info. Right now I prefer to work with the latest stable
release.
For now I will avoid this problem by duplicating the expression
referenced by the alias, but I'll be watching the DERBY-883
incorporation process into the 10.2 release.
Thanks,
Robert
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
Stanley Bradbury wrote:
Robert Enyedi wrote:
Isn't it possible to reference an alias from inside the HAVING clause?
The documentation does not touch this issue. Or is there a more
maintainable way to rewrite the erroneous query?
Regards,
Robert
It looks to me like the fix for DERBY-883 might address this problem.
You can download the beta version of 10.2 and test it, if you do so
please post your results to this thread as feedback on the 10.2 feature.
The fix for DERBY-883 is not in the 10.2 beta yet. Hopefully it will be
in the next 10.2 snapshot, beta or release candidate.
You can try it out by downloading the trunk source and building it.
Dan.
