Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!aioe.org!news.glorb.com!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!lust.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: SQL Puzzle - too many dimensions Followup-To: comp.lang.java.programmer Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 00:01:38 +1200 Organization: Geek Central Lines: 14 Message-ID: References: <92nbumFrggU1@mid.individual.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 118-92-95-178.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Trace: lust.ihug.co.nz 1304856098 1028 118.92.95.178 (8 May 2011 12:01:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@ihug.co.nz NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 12:01:38 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/4.4.7 Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:3807 In message <92nbumFrggU1@mid.individual.net>, Robert Klemme wrote: > On 08.05.2011 04:00, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> In message, wrote: >> >>> But anyway, this is in an Oracle DB, and they don't let you include >>> columns in a group-by query that aren't explicitly group-by that way. >> >> Sounds like as good a time as any to move away from Oracle. > > That's ridiculous. This query can be easily done with Oracle. That wasn’t quite what I meant.