To clarify my own post: I'd expect the SELECT to fail in both cases. On Friday, 28 August 2015 12:41:10 UTC+2, Steve McLeod wrote: > > I agree with Taras here - I've been bitten by the same behaviour. But this > topic's title is misleading; it not because of the HAVING keyword and it is > not because of the column alias. > > Fundamentally, depending on the data in the table, sometimes you can > include a column in the select clause that is not in the group by clause. > Here is a simple repro : > > create table foobar (col1 int, col2 int); > insert into foobar (col1, col2) values (1, 2); > > -- this time the select works > select col1, col2 from foobar group by col1; > > insert into foobar (col1, col2) values (1, 3); > > -- this time the select fails > select col1, col2 from foobar group by col1; > > Output: > > Column "COL2" must be in the GROUP BY list; SQL statement: > select col1, col2 from foobar group by col1 [90016-176] > > > On Friday, 28 August 2015 10:37:49 UTC+2, Taras Fedkiv wrote: >> >> Hi Thomas, >> Could you please answer the questions from previous email? >> My API allows clients to enter SELECT queries which are executed on H2 >> db. Thats why logical H2 behaviur is very important. >> >> I look forward to your reply, >> Taras >> >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
