My vote to raise an error, using the reasons that you say.

But, for now on, I think we must move this out of ib-support. :-)

Artur

----- Original Message -----
From: "Svein Erling Tysv?r" <svein.erling.tysvaer@...>
To: <ib-support@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 10:37 PM
Subject: [ib-support] Re: Found possible bug on FB 1.0 build 821


> >I thought that even without an order specified, the engine is supposed
> >to use the natural one. As Oracle has its ROWID, I think FB has its
> >RDB$DBKEY (or something like that) that is generated after the
> >insertions and stablished some order. So, if in regular selects I use to
> >obtain the same result set (in natural order) why not in subselects?
> >Aren't the rows returned in a top-down sequence, according to the
> >information in the system tables?
>
> You are right Fernando, FB has rdb$db_key and it is constant for the
> duration of your transaction
> (http://www.cvalde.com/document/mysteriousDbKey.htm explains it very
well).
> And you have convinced me that it is indeed a bug - although I am not
> certain whether the fix should be to cater for FIRST/SKIP within the
> subselect or raise an error at compile time saying that FIRST/SKIP in a
> subselect is not allowed (you have not convinced me that your original
query
> is a good way to do what you tried to do).
>
> Set
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> ib-support-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>