Jinfeng,

What does postgres return for the following query in your example?

select "user" from t1;

-- Zelaine

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 7:39 PM, John Omernik <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hmm, you are correct, I don't have to like it :) but there is both logic
> and precedence here.  Thanks for following up
>
> John
>
> On Monday, May 23, 2016, Jinfeng Ni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > An quoted identifier is still an identifier (Drill uses back tick as
> > quote). Per SQL standard,  identifier CURRENT_USER / USER/
> > CURRENT_SESSION/etc are implicit function calls; no () is required.
> >
> > I checked Postgre, and seems it has the same behavior.
> >
> > mydb=# create table t1 (id int, "user" varchar(10));
> >
> > mydb=# insert into t1 values(100, 'ABC');
> > INSERT 0 1
> >
> > mydb=# select * from t1;
> >  id  | user
> > -----+------
> >  100 | ABC
> > (1 row)
> >
> > mydb=# select user from t1;
> >  current_user
> > --------------
> >  postgres
> > (1 row)
> >
> > mydb=# select t1.user from t1;
> >  user
> > ------
> >  ABC
> > (1 row)
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 5:12 PM, John Omernik <[email protected]
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > Can (should) things inside back ticks be callable? I guess this makes a
> > > very difficult situation from a usability standpoint because user is a
> > not
> > > uncommon column name (think security logs, web logs, etc) yet in the
> > > current setup there is lots of possibility for assumptions on calling
> > back
> > > tick user back tick and without an error users may have wrong, but
> > "error"
> > > free results.
> > > On May 23, 2016 4:54 PM, "Jinfeng Ni" <[email protected]
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The problem here is that identifier 'user' is not only a reserved
> > >> word, but also represents a special function ==  current_user() call.
> > >> The identifier 'user', whether it's quoted or not, could mean either
> > >> column name or the function call.  Without the table alias, it could
> > >> be ambiguous to sql parser. The table alias informs the parser that
> > >> this identifier is not a function call, but a regular identifier, thus
> > >> removes the ambiguity.
> > >>
> > >> This is different from other cases you use quoted reserved word to
> > >> represent a column name, since those reserved words do not represent a
> > >> special function, thus no ambiguity.
> > >>
> > >> select `update`, `insert` from dfs.tmp.`1.json`;
> > >> +---------+---------+
> > >> | update  | insert  |
> > >> +---------+---------+
> > >> | abc     | 100     |
> > >> +---------+---------+
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:44 AM, John Omernik <[email protected]
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> > Ya, as I am testing, this works, however, the users of the system
> > expect
> > >> to
> > >> > be able to use `user` and while I can provide them instructions to
> > use a
> > >> > table alias, I am very worried that they will forget and since it
> > doesn't
> > >> > error, but instead puts in a different string, this could lead to
> bad
> > >> > downstream results...
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:41 PM, John Omernik <[email protected]
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4692
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I see an alias would work as a tmp fix, but this should be address
> (I
> > >> >> wonder if other words may have a problem too?)
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Andries Engelbrecht <
> > >> >> [email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> Hmm interesting.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> As a workaround just use a table alias when referencing the
> column.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Might be good to se if there is a JIRA for this, or file one if
> not.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> --Andries
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> > On May 23, 2016, at 10:28 AM, John Omernik <[email protected]
> > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > I have data with a field name user.
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > When I select, with backticks, it doesn't show the field, but
> > >> instead my
> > >> >>> > current logged in user...
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > select CONVERT_FROM(`user`, 'UTF8') as `user` from table limit
> 10;
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > Shouldn't the backticks allow me to reference the field
> properly?
> > >> >>> >
> > >> >>> > John
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
>
>
> --
> Sent from my iThing
>

Reply via email to