siddharthteotia commented on code in PR #9833:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/9833#discussion_r1027687886
##########
pinot-query-runtime/src/test/resources/queries/SelectHaving.json:
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+{
+ "select_expression_test": {
+ "tables": {
+ "test_having": {
+ "schema":[
+ {"name": "a", "type": "INT"},
+ {"name": "b", "type": "INT"},
+ {"name": "c", "type": "STRING"},
+ {"name": "d", "type": "STRING"}
+ ],
+ "inputs": [
+ [0, 1, "XXXX", "A"],
+ [1, 2, "AAAA", "b"],
+ [2, 2, "AAAA", "c"],
+ [3, 3, "BBBB", "D"],
+ [4, 3, "BBBB", "e"],
+ [5, 3, "bbbb", "F"],
+ [6, 4, "cccc", "g"],
+ [7, 4, "cccc", "h"],
+ [8, 4, "CCCC", "I"],
+ [9, 4, "CCCC", "j"]
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "queries": [
+ {
+ "sql":"SELECT b, c FROM test_having GROUP BY b, c HAVING count(*) = 1
ORDER BY b, c;",
+ "ignored": true
+ },
+ {
+ "sql":"SELECT b, c FROM test_having GROUP BY b, c HAVING b = 3 ORDER
BY b, c;",
+ "ignored": true
+ },
+ {
+ "sql":"SELECT lower(c), count(c) FROM test_having GROUP BY lower(c)
HAVING count(*) > 2 OR min(a) = max(a) ORDER BY lower(c);",
+ "ignored": true
+ },
+ {
+ "sql":"SELECT c, max(a) FROM test_having GROUP BY c HAVING count(*) >
2 OR min(a) = max(a) ORDER BY c;",
+ "ignored": true
+ },
+ {
+ "sql":"SELECT min(a), max(a) FROM test_having HAVING min(a) = max(a);",
Review Comment:
Is this for invalid / unsupported queries ?
Afaik, use of HAVING without GROUP BY is not a valid SQL syntax. I think
Postgres, MySQL all support HAVING for GROUP BY aggregation queries.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@pinot.apache.org
