db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sai Pullabhotla" <Sai.Pullabho...@jMethods.com>
Subject RE: Derby complains on SQL that has ORDER BY that order column is not in query result, but it's there
Date Sun, 20 Jan 2008 16:58:48 GMT

I know some databases do require that the ORDER BY clause use the column
ALIASEs if any. I'm not sure if it is an SQL standard. So, if you change the
ORDER BY to ORDER BY pos_18_37_, it should work. 

Sai Pullabhotla
President
jMethods, Inc. 
Phone: +1 (402) 408-5753 
Fax: +1 (402) 408-6861
www.jMethods.com 
-----Original Message-----
From: Roman Puchkovskiy [mailto:roman.puchkovskiy@blandware.com] 
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2008 10:50 AM
To: derby-user@db.apache.org
Subject: Re: Derby complains on SQL that has ORDER BY that order column is
not in query result, but it's there


pos18_37_ is just an alias for menuitem0_."pos", so why query is rejected?


Donald McLean-3 wrote:
> 
> But didn't you select it "as pos18_37_"?
> 
> On Jan 20, 2008 9:35 AM, Roman Puchkovskiy
> <roman.puchkovskiy@blandware.com> wrote:
>>
>> as visibility17_37_, menuitem0_."pos" as pos18_37_,
>> menuitem0_."js_onclick"
>>
>> Error is produced: "The ORDER BY clause may not contain column 'pos',
>> since
>> the query specifies DISTINCT and that column does not appear in the query
>> result."
>>
>> But "pos" column is in 'select' clause!
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Derby-complains-on-SQL-that-has-ORDER-BY-that-order-co
lumn-is-not-in-query-result%2C-but-it%27s-there-tp14982335p14983729.html
Sent from the Apache Derby Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message