Hi Manuel,
2018-02-26 22:43 GMT+01:00 Manuel Rossetti <[email protected]>: > Lukas, > > Thanks for looking into this. If it makes any difference, I can execute > the query: > > SELECT * > FROM RESOURCE > WHERE ID NOT IN (SELECT RESOURCEID_FK FROM RES_ISSUE_ASSIGNMENT > UNION > SELECT RESOURCEID_FK FROM RES_RECEIPT_ASSIGNMENT); > Yes indeed. The problem (in Derby) is really the nested select's asterisk. This is a missing feature in Derby, see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6983 When fixing #7222 in jOOQ, the fix might include generating the actual column list instead of an asterisk (unless Derby will fix DERBY-6983 soon, in case of which jOOQ's workaround won't be necessary). https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/7222 > directly on the derby database (e.g. from using ij or jOOQ string query > and it executes fine, returning the expected result. So, does this mean > that derby does support the nested query. I will try the not exists > approach and see what happens. Here is an excellent related blog post: > > https://explainextended.com/2009/09/15/not-in-vs-not- > exists-vs-left-join-is-null-sql-server/ > Yes, I'm aware of this post, although beware that it is specific to SQL Server and from 2009, so I'm sure not everything applies in the same way for Derby -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
