Ruslan Zakirov <ruslan.zakirov@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I know how to fix the problem and I know that ORDER BY should be in the > outermost select. > However, I want to write a test case that shows that the old code is wrong, > but can not create > minimal set of tables to reproduce it. With this I'm looking for help. The ORDER BY in the sub-select will be honored at the output of the sub-select. To have a different ordering at the final output, you need the upper query to do something that would re-order the rows. Joining the sub-select to something else might make that happen, or you could apply DISTINCT or some other non-trivial processing in the upper query. regards, tom lane
