ANSI 89 joins not translating to 92 syntax correctly ---------------------------------------------------- Key: TEIID-3641 URL: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/TEIID-3641 Project: Teiid Issue Type: Bug Components: JDBC Connector Affects Versions: 8.11.2 Environment: Ubuntu Linux Trusty Reporter: Don Krapohl Assignee: Steven Hawkins Fix For: 8.12 SQL 89 syntax being translated to SQL 92 has the ON portion of the join in the wrong place when there are multiple tables. Example source query: select sum(Table3.sales) as c1, Table1.customer_id as c2, Table1.customer_name as c3, Table2.store_id as c4 from dim_customer Table1, dim_store Table2, fact_sales Table3 where ( Table1.customer_id = Table3.customer_id and Table1.customer_id = 3184 and Table2.store_id = Table3.store_id and Table2.store_id = 9020 and Table3.customer_id = 3184 and Table3.store_id = 9020 ) group by Table1.customer_id, Table1.customer_name, Table2.store_id is translated to SELECT SUM(g_2.sales), g_0.customer_id, g_0.customer_name, g_1.store_id FROM dim_customer g_0 JOIN dim_store g_1 JOIN fact_sales g_2 ON g_1.store_id = g_2.store_id ON g_0.customer_id = g_2.customer_id WHERE g_0.customer_id = 3184 AND g_1.store_id = 9020 AND g_2.customer_id = 3184 AND g_2.store_id = 9020 GROUP BY g_0.customer_id, g_0.customer_name, g_1.store_id Notice the two JOIN... JOIN... followed by two ON... ON... statements. Our database (Impala) doesn't recognize this pattern of join syntax. I haven't tested to determine if it's just Impala that doesn't recognize this syntax (implying a translator bug) or core query parsing. Expected query should be something close to: SELECT SUM(g_2.sales), g_0.customer_id, g_0.customer_name, g_1.store_id FROM dim_customer g_0 JOIN fact_sales g_2 ON g_0.customer_id = g_2.customer_id JOIN dim_store g_1 ON g_1.store_id = g_2.store_id WHERE g_0.customer_id = 3184 AND g_1.store_id = 9020 AND g_2.customer_id = 3184 AND g_2.store_id = 9020 GROUP BY g_0.customer_id, g_0.customer_name, g_1.store_id