"Peter Wright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think this demonstrates the problem much better than I could explain in > words. The bug is shown in the two > SELECT queries with a WHERE clause. Very bizarre.
I've applied a patch that corrects this problem in CVS HEAD, but since it changes the behavior of HAVING in a nontrivial way, I'm inclined to think that we should not backpatch it into existing release branches. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly