Home Forums Article Discussions Article Discussions by Author Discuss content posted by Hugo Kornelis HAVING without GROUP BY RE: HAVING without GROUP BY

  • August 31, 2010 at 8:26 am

    #1214347

    webrunner (8/31/2010)

    Thanks for the great question. The answer still seems counterintuitive to me - I expected that selecting COUNT(*) would return at least one row (the count result, whether 0 or more), but I guess it works differently in these rare cases.

    Thanks again - I've been learning a lot lately with these questions.

    - webrunner

    But if I added a GROUP BY clause (e.g. GROUP BY Col1), would you expect two rows (with values 3 and 0), or only one row (with value 3)? Why would HAVING behave differently when there is only one group? Or when there are many groups, but none satsifies the condition?

    (I do agree that it's coutnerintuitive, though - heck, I picked the wrong answer myself when I answered the question this morning!)

    Hugo Kornelis, SQL Server/Data Platform MVP (2006-2016)
    Visit my SQL Server blog: https://sqlserverfast.com/blog/
    SQL Server Execution Plan Reference: https://sqlserverfast.com/epr/