[ 
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-245?page=comments#action_12361678 ] 

Michael Bouschen commented on JDO-245:
--------------------------------------

A lot of comments, I'll try to give answers.

CLR:  There is only one thing wrong with this query: the HAVING clause is not a 
boolean expression. It's ok to have SUM(salary) in the SELECT clause because 
you can SELECT terms that are either in the GROUPING clause or are aggregates.

MBO: I think the HAVING clause "HAVING firstname" is invalid for two reasons: 
it is not a boolean expression and uses a field firstname w/o aggregate that is 
not part of the grouping. These are the two errors Andy and I were referring 
to. 

CLR: I think this should be changed to AVG(weeklyhours) to be valid. Then the 
test case is only testing the HAVING error. 

MBO: I already changed the negative test to
  SELECT department, AVG(weeklyhours) FROM Employee GROUP BY department HAVING 
firstname
when fixing the positive test of class Having (see JDO-244).

CLR: Yet another comment. The title of this JIRA is the HAVING clause 
containing fields that are not part of the result clause. Actually, it's legal 
for any aggregate expression to be in the HAVING clause regardless of whether 
it is in the result.

MBO: I think the title of this JIRA is misleading. It should talk about a 
missing exception for an invalid HAVING clause and should not mention the 
result clause at all. Maybe the test class Having should be moved from package 
result to a different package (e.g. jdoql).

CLR: So maybe we need another positive test for HAVING that has an expression 
that isn't contained in the SELECT clause.
e.g. SELECT department, AVG(weeklyhours) FROM Employee GROUP BY department 
HAVING COUNT(personid) > 1

MBO: Yes, good idea. I will add this query. 

CLR: And another negative test for HAVING that uses a term that's not an 
aggregate.
SELECT department, AVG(weeklyhours) FROM Employee GROUP BY department HAVING 
middlename != NULL

MBO: OK, then we are back to the original negative query which had a HAVING 
clause: HAVING firstname = 'emp1first'. But I can add this, too.

> JPOX must throw JDOUserException for queries specifying having clause 
> refering fields which are not part of the result clause.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>          Key: JDO-245
>          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JDO-245
>      Project: JDO
>         Type: Bug
>   Components: tck20
>     Reporter: Michael Watzek
>     Assignee: Andy Jefferson

>
> The test case Having fails for the query below. Query compilation is expected 
> to throw a JDOUserException because the having clause contains field 
> firstname which is not part of the result clause.
> 14:22:53,437 (main) DEBUG [org.apache.jdo.tck] - Compiling API query: SELECT 
> department, SUM(salary) FROM org.apache.jdo.tck.pc.company.Employee GROUP BY 
> department HAVING firstname == 'emp1First' 
> 14:22:53,453 (main) DEBUG [org.apache.jdo.tck] - Query compilation must throw 
> JDOUserException: null
> 14:22:53,453 (main) INFO  [org.apache.jdo.tck] - Exception during setUp or 
> runtest: 
> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Assertion A14.6.10-2 (Having) failed: 
> Query compilation must throw JDOUserException: null
>       at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47)
>       at org.apache.jdo.tck.JDO_Test.fail(JDO_Test.java:546)
>       at org.apache.jdo.tck.query.QueryTest.compile(QueryTest.java:915)
>       at org.apache.jdo.tck.query.QueryTest.compile(QueryTest.java:878)
>       at 
> org.apache.jdo.tck.query.QueryTest.compileAPIQuery(QueryTest.java:793)
>       at org.apache.jdo.tck.query.result.Having.testNegative(Having.java:120)
>       at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>       at 
> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
>       at 
> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
>       at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:324)
>       at junit.framework.TestCase.runTest(TestCase.java:154)
>       at org.apache.jdo.tck.JDO_Test.runBare(JDO_Test.java:204)
>       at junit.framework.TestResult$1.protect(TestResult.java:106)
>       at junit.framework.TestResult.runProtected(TestResult.java:124)
>       at junit.framework.TestResult.run(TestResult.java:109)
>       at junit.framework.TestCase.run(TestCase.java:118)
>       at junit.framework.TestSuite.runTest(TestSuite.java:208)
>       at junit.framework.TestSuite.run(TestSuite.java:203)
>       at junit.framework.TestSuite.runTest(TestSuite.java:208)
>       at junit.framework.TestSuite.run(TestSuite.java:203)
>       at junit.textui.TestRunner.doRun(TestRunner.java:116)
>       at junit.textui.TestRunner.doRun(TestRunner.java:109)
>       at 
> org.apache.jdo.tck.util.BatchTestRunner.start(BatchTestRunner.java:120)
>       at org.apache.jdo.tck.util.BatchTestRunner.main(BatchTestRunner.java:95)

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
   http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Reply via email to