The SQL standard doesn't allow to use in HAVING clause fields that are not
present in GROUP BY clause and not under any aggregate function in the HAVING
clause. However, mysql allows using such fields. This extension assume that
the non-grouping fields will have the same group-wise values. Otherwise, the
result will be unpredictable. This extension allowed in strict
MODE_ONLY_FULL_GROUP_BY sql mode results in misunderstanding of HAVING
capabilities.
The new error message ER_NON_GROUPING_FIELD_USED message is added. It says
"non-grouping field '%-.64s' is used in %-.64s clause". This message is
supposed to be used for reporting errors when some field is not found in the
GROUP BY clause but have to be present there. Use cases for this message are
this bug and when a field is present in a SELECT item list not under any
aggregate function and there is GROUP BY clause present which doesn't mention
that field. It renders the ER_WRONG_FIELD_WITH_GROUP error message obsolete as
being more descriptive.
The resolve_ref_in_select_and_group() function now reports the
ER_NON_GROUPING_FIELD_FOUND error if the strict mode is set and the field for
HAVING clause is found in the SELECT item list only.
The problem was due to the fact that with --lower-case-table-names set to 1
the function find_field_in_group did not convert the prefix 'HU' in
HU.PROJ.CITY into lower case when looking for it in the group list. Yet the
names in the group list were extended by the database name in lower case.
A query with a group by and having clauses could return a wrong
result set if the having condition contained a constant conjunct
evaluated to FALSE.
It happened because the pushdown condition for table with
grouping columns lost its constant conjuncts.
Pushdown conditions are always built by the function make_cond_for_table
that ignores constant conjuncts. This is apparently not correct when
constant false conjuncts are present.
from the select list and TEXT field
make setup_copy_fields to insert Item_copy_string for blobs in
the beginning of the copy_funcs (push_back instead of push_front)
the thing is that Item_copy_string::copy for function can call
Item_copy_string::val_int for blob via Item_ref.
But if Item_copy_string::copy for blob isn't called before,
it's value will be wrong.
So all the Item_copy_string::copy for blobs should be called before
Item_copy_string::copy for functions.
