W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: HAVING vs. FILTER

From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@talis.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:53:05 +0000
Message-ID: <4AFD48A1.4020708@talis.com>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
CC: Lee Feigenbaum <lee@thefigtrees.net>, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>


On 13/11/2009 07:18, Axel Polleres wrote:
> One concern raised was IIRC why we need both if HAVING is anyway redundant by:
>
> SELECT AGG(?X)
> WHERE P
> GROUP BY G
> HAVING R
>
>   being equivalent to
>
> { SELECT AGG(?X)
> WHERE P
> GROUP BY G }
> FILTER R

Can R be (count(*)>0) ?

	Andy

>
> which would HAVING really make the very same as FILTER in the end of th the day.
> Can we confirm/decline this (conjectured) equivalence?
>
>
> best,
> Axel
Received on Friday, 13 November 2009 11:53:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:40 GMT