>> done. but i did not test it :(. so be carefull > > Yes, I've noticed that there is a syntax error due to a missing > closing parenthesis. After fixing that, the integration tests fail, > though. I think, rownum is renamed for subsequent filtering at the > wrong nesting level. I'll fix this too and commit shortly
As a matter of fact, the bind values were bound in the wrong order after applying the pull request, now that the upper limit is bound to the statement before the lower limit (as opposed to how it was before). This is a bit tricky, as binding limits is externalised to org.jooq.impl.Limit, whereas the SQL rendering for this complex kind of simulation has to be taken care of in org.jooq.impl.AbstractSubSelect The fixes contained in this commit here now run smoothly through all Oracle integration tests: https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/commit/5c6638bd5cb6029d067bae68c1a107bb80f81cb6 Integration test Java Code: Result<Record> result = create().select(nestedID, count()) .from(create().selectFrom(TBook()) .orderBy(TBook_ID().desc()) .limit(1, 2).asTable("nested")) .groupBy(nestedID) .orderBy(nestedID) .fetch(); Rendered SQL: select "nested"."AUTHOR_ID", count(*) from (select * from ( select limit_133537784.*, rownum as rownum_133537784 from ( select "TEST"."T_BOOK"."ID", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."AUTHOR_ID", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."CO_AUTHOR_ID", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."DETAILS_ID", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."TITLE", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."PUBLISHED_IN", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."LANGUAGE_ID", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."CONTENT_TEXT", "TEST"."T_BOOK"."CONTENT_PDF" from "TEST"."T_BOOK" order by "TEST"."T_BOOK"."ID" desc ) limit_133537784 where rownum <= (1 + 2) ) where rownum_133537784 > 1) "nested" group by "nested"."AUTHOR_ID" order by "nested"."AUTHOR_ID" asc Note, I have also removed an unnecessary nesting level from the rendered SELECT statement. So #1020 is now fixed: https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/jooq/ticket/1020 Cheers Lukas
