SELECT * FROM concept of outer union is supported by KQL: If the ON clause includes the “*” symbol (it may be specified as the last or the only member of the list), then extra name matches beyond those in the ON clause are allowed, and the result’s columns include all matching columns in the order they are present in the left argument. If the BY NAME clause is not specified, the matching is done positionally. The clause indicates that the union is matching up values not based on position but by name of the columns. Net default value for the non-nullable types (e.g., 0 for int). The default values are null for nullable types and the. For such columns, default values are supplied for the 'missing cells'. This creates a situation where each row coming from one of the sides has 'missing columns' that are present only on the other side. As opposed to the other set expressions, the output schema of the OUTER UNION includes both the matching columns and the non-matching columns from both sides. Requires the BY NAME clause and the ON list. Columns that do not match by name are excluded from the result table, except for the OUTER UNION operator. CORR causes PROC SQL to match the columns in table expressions by name and not by ordinal position. The CORRESPONDING keyword is used only when a set operator is specified. SAS SQL has specific operator to handle that scenario:

Normally you need to have the same number of columns when you're using set based operators so Kangkan's answer is correct. OR if the above does not solve your problem, how about creating an ALIAS in the columns like this: (the query is not the same as yours but the point here is how to add alias in the column.) SELECT id_table_a, Select col_a, col_c, col_b from test2_1790 Select col_a, col_b, col_c from test2_1790 Ī more frequent scenario for this error is when you inadvertently swap (or shift) two or more columns in the SELECT list: select col_a, col_b, col_c from test1_1790 Select col_a, col_b, col_c from test1_1790 This type of errors can be easily avoided by entering the column list explicitly: ORA-01790: expression must have same datatype as corresponding expressionĪs you see the root cause of the error is in the mismatching column ordering that is implied by the use of * as column list specifier. this example below produces an error: create table test1_1790 ( The below description from another answer will come handy.Īre the results above the same as the sequence of columns in your table? because oracle is strict in column orders. But mismatch in the Order of data type caused an error.

Mysql union with same value