Thank you all for the insight. PG is obviously my first choice (that is why I am switching)... the hope is to do so without having to change everything. Thanks for the solution David - it did the trick.
Nate On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 5:01 PM, David Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 5:43 PM, Nathan Thatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Is this the correct way to do this, or is there a better way / a way > > to get PostgreSQL to recognize an alias in the HAVING clause? > > As Tom pointed out, f1's not in scope for the HAVING clause. If you're > that concerned about expression duplication, you could move the > calculation into a sub-select: > > SELECT COUNT(*), f1 FROM (SELECT id % 3 AS f1 FROM table) t1 GROUP BY > f1 HAVING f1 <> 0; > > -- > - David T. Wilson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
