4 messages in com.mysql.lists.mysqlRe: Having
FromSent OnAttachments
Alai...@sip.fr28 Feb 2000 11:21 
sin...@mysql.com29 Feb 2000 06:18 
Ralph Corderoy03 Mar 2000 14:20 
sin...@mysql.com04 Mar 2000 05:54 
Subject:Re: Having
From:sin...@mysql.com (sin@mysql.com)
Date:03/04/2000 05:54:42 AM
List:com.mysql.lists.mysql

Ralph Corderoy writes:

Hi,

Well don't just repeat it. Explain where the other guy's argument breaks down. Do you think he is interpreting the text he quoted wrongly? Do you think the quoted text is junk? Do you know all the other databases do it the MySQL way?

Ralph.

Hi!

Well, the other guy's argument breaks down, because he hopes that GROUP BY and HAVING could somehow run in parallel, or in some form of synchronisation.

That is simply not possible. HAVING is always run last Only ORDER BY and LIMIT can come after. And PROCEDURE.

All RDBMS that I tried, like Oracla and Gupta , behave in the same manner, which is of course defined like that in standard itself.

Simply, after GROUP BY aggreagation is finished, HAVING condition is applied to the obtained result set.

Regards,

Sinisa

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | TcX ____ __ _____ _____ ___ == mys@tcx.se | | /*/\*\/\*\ /*/ \*\ /*/ \*\ |*| Sinisa Milivojevic | | /*/ /*/ /*/ \*\_ |*| |*||*| mailto:sin@mysql.com | | /*/ /*/ /*/\*\/*/ \*\|*| |*||*| Larnaka, Cyprus | | /*/ /*/ /*/\*\_/*/ \*\_/*/ |*|____ | | ^^^^^^^^^^^^/*/^^^^^^^^^^^\*\^^^^^^^^^^^ | | /*/ \*\ Developers Team | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+