Re: Issue with an SQL having clause

[Pete Hall <pete@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

My old eyes are getting a little weak, but I don't see SQREQ in the list
of columns in the result set. My understanding is that HAVING runs
against the result set. What happens if you use openS0 and ordqty in the
HAVING clause? If that doesn't work, try including sqreq, sqfin, lqord
and lqshp in the result set. I'm 87.3% certain that will work.

On 2011-02-03 18:57, Pete Helgren wrote:
> I need to select records where the total of some fields is greater than
> zero.  The field comparisons are from two different tables.  Here is the
> sql:
>
> select ixprod,ixdesc,extvin,(lqord-lqshp) as ordqty,
> coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0) as openSO
> from fix inner join ecl on ixprod=lprod
> inner join eclx01 on lord=extord and lline=exline
> left outer join fso on ixprod=sprod
> group by ixprod,ixdesc,extvin, (lqord-lqshp),
> coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0)
> having ((coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0)) - (lqord-lqshp)) > 0 <---- It doesn't
> like this line
>
> I am running this in an interactive SQL session to test it and it is
> complaining about the SQREQ column in the having clause.
>
> This DOES work:
>
> select ixprod,ixdesc,extvin,(lqord-lqshp) as ordqty,
> coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0) as openSO
> from fix inner join ecl on ixprod=lprod
> inner join eclx01 on lord=extord and lline=exline
> left outer join fso on ixprod=sprod
> group by ixprod,ixdesc,extvin, (lqord-lqshp),
> coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0)
> having  coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0) > 0
>
> Yet with addition of one set of parenthesis in the having clause, it
> will stop working:
>
> select ixprod,ixdesc,extvin,(lqord-lqshp) as ordqty,
> coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0) as openSO
> from fix inner join ecl on ixprod=lprod
> inner join eclx01 on lord=extord and lline=exline
> left outer join fso on ixprod=sprod
> group by ixprod,ixdesc,extvin, (lqord-lqshp),
> coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0)
> having  (coalesce(sqreq-sqfin,0)) > 0 <-----This will not work.
>
> The reason for the parens is so that the having clause is properly
> evaluated, but I must be doing something wrong.
>
> What am I missing?


- -- 
Pete Hall
pete@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAk1LXkAACgkQXczQcKdXKg6kfACeKQ/eFreI0BQ5MqvFLseQ3XFp
LXoAniA9ux+shLcQi8EOcfhHBBgj5Uho
=qx8q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----