From: nnj@riseup.net
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: I notice Postgresql 'HAVING' doesn't work.
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2017 01:09:04 +0000
Message-ID: <20170105010904.10139.25730@wrigleys.postgresql.org> (raw)
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-docs>
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/tutorial-agg.html
Description:
Following this tutorial The Nested Set Model on
http://mikehillyer.com/articles/managing-hierarchical-data-in-mysql/
Section: Depth of a Sub-Tree.
SELECT node.name, (COUNT(parent.name) - (sub_tree.depth + 1)) AS depth
FROM nested_category AS node,
nested_category AS parent,
nested_category AS sub_parent,
(
SELECT node.name, (COUNT(parent.name) - 1) AS depth
FROM nested_category AS node,
nested_category AS parent
WHERE node.lft BETWEEN parent.lft AND parent.rgt
AND node.name = 'PORTABLE ELECTRONICS'
GROUP BY node.name, node.lft
ORDER BY node.lft
)AS sub_tree
WHERE node.lft BETWEEN parent.lft AND parent.rgt
AND node.lft BETWEEN sub_parent.lft AND sub_parent.rgt
AND sub_parent.name = sub_tree.name
GROUP BY node.name, node.lft, sub_tree.depth
ORDER BY node.lft;
+----------------------+---------+
| name | depth |
|----------------------+---------|
| PORTABLE ELECTRONICS | 0 |
| MP3 PLAYERS | 1 |
| FLASH | 2 |
| CD PLAYERS | 1 |
| 2 WAY RADIOS | 1 |
+----------------------+---------+
Section: Find the Immediate Subordinates of a Node.
SELECT node.name, (COUNT(parent.name) - (sub_tree.depth + 1)) AS depth
FROM nested_category AS node,
nested_category AS parent,
nested_category AS sub_parent,
(
SELECT node.name, (COUNT(parent.name) - 1) AS depth
FROM nested_category AS node,
nested_category AS parent
WHERE node.lft BETWEEN parent.lft AND parent.rgt
AND node.name = 'PORTABLE ELECTRONICS'
GROUP BY node.name, node.lft
ORDER BY node.lft
)AS sub_tree
WHERE node.lft BETWEEN parent.lft AND parent.rgt
AND node.lft BETWEEN sub_parent.lft AND sub_parent.rgt
AND sub_parent.name = sub_tree.name
GROUP BY node.name, node.lft, sub_tree.depth
HAVING depth <= 1
ORDER BY node.lft;
Adding 'HAVING depth <= 1' to the query still return the same results as
above instead of this:
+----------------------+---------+
| name | depth |
|----------------------+---------|
| PORTABLE ELECTRONICS | 0 |
| MP3 PLAYERS | 1 |
| FLASH | 1 |
| CD PLAYERS | 1 |
| 2 WAY RADIOS | 1 |
+----------------------+---------+
NOTE: I edited the query by add node.lft, sub_tree.depth to the GROUP BY.
I don't know if I'm doing anything wrong?
--
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: nnj@riseup.net
Subject: Re: I notice Postgresql 'HAVING' doesn't work.
In-Reply-To: <20170105010904.10139.25730@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox