-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
join missing the 'on' filter #1229
Comments
Greetings.
SELECT t1.column1
, t1.column2
, t2.field1
, t2.field2
FROM t_dt_ytb_01 t1
, t_dt_ytb_02 t2
ON t1.column1 = t2.field1
; You can also test it online here
Please double check and close this issue, when confirmed. |
It could be, like using If you do not use However this seems like a bug to me, as @manticore-projects already mentioned, this |
The problem is in production
but in the grammar is no check when this
So the solution should be a semantic Lookahead here with the check |
original SQL : select t1.column1,t1.column2,t2.field1,t2.field2 from T_DT_ytb_01 t1 , T_DT_ytb_02 t2 on t1.column1 = t2.field1
after parse SQL: SELECT t1.column1, t1.column2, t2.field1, t2.field2 FROM T_DT_ytb_01 t1, T_DT_ytb_02 t2
What is simple join?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: