SQL7: Order Of Values In IN Clause Affects Results
Dec 14, 1999
Hi!
Has anyone experienced this problem?
Certain queries that work fine in SQL 6.5 and Oracle return inconsistent / inaccurate results in SQL 7 (with SP1). These queries include an IN clause with a range of values.
For example, the following query:
SELECT columnA, columnB, columnC, columnD
FROM table
WHERE columnD = 'I'
AND columnA IN (1,2,3,11,19)
go
returns a different result than this query:
SELECT columnA, columnB, columnC, columnD
FROM table
WHERE columnD = 'I'
AND columnA IN (1,3,11,2,19)
go
The only way we have stumbled upon to get accurate results consistently is to order the range values from largest to smallest:
AND columnA IN (19,11,3,2,1)
Have not seen this documented anywhere. We are in the process of re-ordering these ranges in our code, but I welcome any ideas or comments...
Thanks!
Consider this SQL:SELECT my_field FROM my_table WHERE my_field IN ('value2', 'value1','value3')Simple enough, but is there anyway to specify that the result should beordered exactly like the "IN" clause states? So when this recordsetcomes back, I want it like this:my_field------------value2value1value3Possible?Deane
I have created view by jaoining two table and have order by clause.
The sql generated is as follows
SELECT TOP (100) PERCENT dbo.UWYearDetail.*, dbo.UWYearGroup.* FROM dbo.UWYearDetail INNER JOIN dbo.UWYearGroup ON dbo.UWYearDetail.UWYearGroupId = dbo.UWYearGroup.UWYearGroupId ORDER BY dbo.UWYearDetail.PlanVersionId, dbo.UWYearGroup.UWFinancialPlanSegmentId, dbo.UWYearGroup.UWYear, dbo.UWYearGroup.MandDFlag, dbo.UWYearGroup.EarningsMethod, dbo.UWYearGroup.EffectiveMonth
If I run sql the results are displayed in proper order but the view only order by first item in order by clause.
Has somebody experience same thing? How to fix this issue?
insert into test_sort values('Non-A'); insert into test_sort values('Non-O'); insert into test_sort values('Noni'); insert into test_sort values('Nons');
then execute the following selects: select * from test_sort order by cast( 1 as nvarchar(75));
select * from test_sort order by cast( description as nvarchar(75));
For a variety of reasons we need to change the default sort order in a SQL7 installation on about 25 servers. It's currently case insensitive, but we need to change it to case sensitive. To do this we propose to deinstall and reinstall SQL. In order to preserve the data in the tables can anyone suggest the correct procedure.
I have a problem with the order of the numeric ID in several of my tables in one database. Basically every quarter, using link table i update the figures in my table using basic cut and paste. However this will not work now as the table has become out of order due to the ID'S not beeing in numeric order.example ID 1 7 23 24 15 16 2 3 8 34
I am desperate to get these collums back into order so i can paste my data in how do i do this. i want it to be like this
ON dbo.Track_ID.SM_ID = dbo.transactions.sm_session_id
GROUP BY dbo.Track_ID.TrackID
)
) Once moved to SQL Server 2005 the statement would not return and showed SOS_SCHEDULER_YIELD to be the waittype when executed. This machine is SP1 and needs to be upgraded to SP2, something that is not going to happen near time.
I changed the SQL to the following, SQL Server now runs it in under a second, but now the app is not functioning correctly. Are the above and the following semantically the same?
UPDATE dbo.Track_ID
SET dbo.Track_ID.Processed = 4 --Regular 1 leg call thats been completed
Does anyone know the method to transfer result data of a view or stored procedure in MS SQL 7.0 to MS Access or Excel , Manually or automatically? I did not find the right tool in SQL 7 to do so.
I notice we can transfer table from SQL 7 to MS Access / Excel through DTS. But did not find any tool/menu to transfer result of view / stored procedure.
I am new to SQL 7. Maybe this is a silly ?. Any help will be appreciated.
I have a DB with items which can have lengths from 0 to 400 meter.In my resultset I want to show the items with length 1-400 meter and then the results with length 0 meterHow to build my SQL?
Lets say I have a table named [Leadership] and I want to select the field 'leadershipName' from the [Leadership] Table.
My query would look something like this:
Select leadershipName From Leadership
Now, I would like to order the results of this query... but I don't want to simply order them by ASC or DESC. Instead, I need to order them as follows:
Executive Board Members, Delegates, Grievance Chairs, and Negotiators
My question: Can this be done through MS SQL or do I need to add a field to my [Leadership] table named 'leadershipImportance' or something as an integer to denote the level of importance of the position so that I can order on that value ASC or DESC?
When Access date/time data is transformed to SQL7, it seems to work fine as long as the data contains date information. But, if the data is time only, there is the 2-day diff. coming out of Access.
For date/time data in Access, day 0 is 12/30/1899--for SQL7 it is 1/1/1900.
So, it appears that DTS first converts Access date/time data to a date formatted string and then sends to SQL. This will only be a problem for times....8:00 AM is stored to SQL as 8:00 AM on 12/30/1899, not 1/1/1900. If I try to calculate hours or minutes from midnight (date/time 0) I get a negative number.
Has anyone else encountered this? I guess my choice is to modify DTS to correct for the dates or to run an update once the data is moved.
The ORDER BY clause can include items that do not appear in the select list. However, if SELECT DISTINCT is specified, or if the statement contains a GROUP BY clause, or if the SELECT statement contains a UNION operator, the sort columns must appear in the select list.
If I use the order by clause to sort on a date, where the date andtime stamp are the exact same for multiple records, how does SQLoutput the data?At random... or does it look at the primary key?
My query "select blah, blah, rank from tablewithscores" will return results that can legitimately hold nulls in the rank column. I want to order on the rank column, but those nulls should appear at the bottom of the list
Hello,Ive got a column which stores integers ranging from 0-200. I need to order them so that 1 is first, and 0 is last like 1,2,2,3,4,6,8....98....0,0,0My Order By clause statement looks like 'ORDER BY column_name', but obviously this will put the '0' records at the top. Is there a way around this?Thanks, Curt.
The following SELECT query gives me a list of 50 plus countries. How do I order them by 'United States' First (happens to be ID 225) and then alphabetical? SELECT Country_ID, Country_Long FROM Countries WHERE isIndustrial = 1 ORDER BY Country_Long
Hi! I think the order by clause is driving me crazy.The following T-SQL query works: SELECT count(*) AS c From F_POST Where id=@id Order by c Ok, so far so good, but in the following case it is NOT possible to order the result set according to "count(*)": Select T_Date AS TDATE, count(*) AS c From F_Post Where id=@id Order By case when @OrderBy = 1 then c elseT_DATE DESC This is just strange since it is essentially the same query!? Furthermore, it seems to be inpossible to have a order-by-clause that looks like: Order By case when @OrderBy = 1 then T_Column1 ASC elseT_Column2 DESC
Does anyone know how I can implement querys that do (almost) exactly this what the last 2 querys "should" to do?
like so often my Forums database design (in its simplest form) is:Forums -ForumID -Title -CategoryForumsMsgs -fmID -DateIn -AuthorID -MessageI need to create a sql query which returns all forum titles along with some data for 1) the first message entry (date created and author) and 2) the last one. So how can I do a JOIN query which joins with a ORDER BY clause so that the top/bottom entry only is joined from the messages table?
When I say to sort on a datetime field on descending order, the date is sorted. However, the time difference is not reflected in the results. Any way, we can fix it. i.e. If I have two records with the same dates but different times, the sorting order is not considering the time.
I am trying to pass as an input parameter a user selected order by clause, and instead of repeating the SQL statement with a new Order By based on the parameter, I want to set the Order by using this parameter. I can't get it to work.
IF @StartDate = 'ALL DATES' BEGIN SELECT @MinDate = Min(AccessTime) FROM tblAudit END ELSE BEGIN SELECT @MinDate = @StartDate END
IF @EndDate = 'ALL DATES' BEGIN SELECT @MaxDate = Max(AccessTime) FROM tblAudit END ELSE BEGIN SELECT @MaxDate = @StartDate END
BEGIN SELECT tblReports.ReportName, tblReports.ReportCode, tblAudit.BadAttempts, tblAudit.LogonUser, tblAudit.AccessTime, tblAudit.RemoteHost, tblAudit.RemoteIdent, tblAudit.ExitTime, tblAudit.BrowserType, tblAudit.Access_ID, TotalTime=DateDiff(Minute,tblAudit.AccessTime,tblA udit.ExitTime) FROM tblReports INNER JOIN tblReportsAccess ON tblReports.Report_ID = tblReportsAccess.Report_ID INNER JOIN tblAudit ON tblReportsAccess.Audit_ID = tblAudit.Audit_ID WHERE tblAudit.AccessTime >= @MinDate AND tblAudit.AccessTime <= @MaxDate ORDER BY (SELECT 'ColumnName'=ColumnName FROM tblOrderBy WHERE ColumnName = @OrderBy) END
I have a query that returns several ordered rows where one of the fields in the ORDER BY clause is a date field (DueDate) that we use to see the most pressing deadline first. The problem is that the default value in that field (which other code translates to mean no due date) is 1/1/1900. That means that items with no due date show up before today's import deadline. I can see one potential solution where I join my results on the original table where DueDate>1/1/1900 and then back to my results so I can use an ISNULL() on the field to set a value in the future (like 1/1/9999), but that seems like a really nasty wrong round-about way to do it. I think there has to be something better.
I have a a grid (Fig-1) where i have LineID and corresponding RankValue. I want to sort out the Grid like (Fig-2) where It will be sorted based on Rank Value(Higher to lower) but LineID group should maintain. I am using SqlServer 2008.
Need to pass column to ORDER BY as parameter in sp (possible 8 columns out of total 30). Is there a way to do it avoiding dynamic SQL use(will be used frequently)?
I'm currently have a problem with a query using a top clause. When I run it by itself as a single query, I have no problems and the results are valid. However, if I try duplicate the query after a union clause, the order by ... desc doesn't order properly.
The following is the query I'm using along with the results. Then I'll have the query I was trying to unite and the results (date ranges selected were the same in both):
QUERY 1
select top 1 (s.ldate), v.mdtid, po.odometer, pi.odometer, (pi.odometer-po.odometer) as 'Total Miles'
from EventStrings ES
JOIN schedules s ON ES.SchId=S.SchId JOIN vehicles v ON v.vehicleid=es.vehicleid JOIN Events PO ON PO.schid=es.schid AND PO.EvStrId=ES.EvStrId AND po.activity=4 JOIN Events PI ON PI.schid=es.schid AND PI.EvStrId=ES.EvStrId AND pi.activity=3
WHERE es.providerid in (0,1,4) and s.ldate>=? and s.ldate<=? and v.mdtid=20411
order by s.ldate desc
RESULTS 1
DATE MDT IDPU Odometer DO Odometer Total Miles 12/6/2007 2041112810.6 12874.5 63.9
QUERY 2 (with Union)
select top 1 (s.ldate), v.mdtid, po.odometer, pi.odometer, (pi.odometer-po.odometer) as 'Total Miles'
from EventStrings ES
JOIN schedules s ON ES.SchId=S.SchId JOIN vehicles v ON v.vehicleid=es.vehicleid JOIN Events PO ON PO.schid=es.schid AND PO.EvStrId=ES.EvStrId AND po.activity=4 JOIN Events PI ON PI.schid=es.schid AND PI.EvStrId=ES.EvStrId AND pi.activity=3
WHERE es.providerid in (0,1,4) and s.ldate>=[From Date,Date] and s.ldate<=[To Date,Date] and v.mdtid=20411
Union
select top 1 (s.ldate), v.mdtid, po.odometer, pi.odometer, (pi.odometer-po.odometer) as 'Total Miles'
from EventStrings ES
JOIN schedules s ON ES.SchId=S.SchId JOIN vehicles v ON v.vehicleid=es.vehicleid JOIN Events PO ON PO.schid=es.schid AND PO.EvStrId=ES.EvStrId AND po.activity=4 JOIN Events PI ON PI.schid=es.schid AND PI.EvStrId=ES.EvStrId AND pi.activity=3
WHERE es.providerid in (0,1,4) and s.ldate>=? and s.ldate<=? and v.mdtid=2642
order by s.ldate desc
RESULTS 2
DATE MDT ID PU OdometerDO Odometer Total Miles 4/10/2007 20411 1207.21252.5 45.3 1/2/2007 2642 193652.6193817 164.4
As you can see, the results are sorted very differently. Is there any way to have the order by apply to both queries?
HiI want a simple select query on a column-name (smalldatetime) withvalues dislayed in desc order with null values FIRST.i.e.Select orderdate from ordersorder by ( null values first and then orderdate in desc order)could any one please helpThanks
Hi, Im using a select query in which im using order by clause on a column which is varchar. Im getting wrong result on using the query, the result output is below
For my reports I have a Sort By parameter which has 2 values - Customer Name & Customer Number. for my dataset I have added @SortBy as parameter and assigned the value = Parameter!SortBy.value.
In the query I want to set the Order By clause based on the user selection. eg.:
select * from dbo.customers where name = @CustomerName order by @SortBy
However, I am unable to do this. I always get an exception for the order by clause no mater what. I have also tried the following queries in the query designer for the dataset customers but none of them work
="select * from dbo.customers where name " + @CustomerName + " order by " + @SortBy
select * from dbo.customers where name = @CustomerName order by + @SortBy
I know that I can set the interactive sort on the column headers and the interactive sort works, but the customer wants to have the ability to set the Sort By using the dropdown list.
I have just transferred my site to a new server with SBS R2 Premium, so the site's database changed from SQL 2000 to SQL 2005. I find that searches are now returning results in random order, even though they use a view with an Order By clause to force the order I want. I find that the results are unordered when I test the view with Management Studio, so the issue is unrelated to my VB/ASP Net code. Using my SQL update tool (SQL Compare, from Redgate) I find that there are no differences in the views, or the underlying tables. Using Management Studio to test a number of views, I find that I have a general problem with all views. For example, one of the simpler views is simply a selection of fields from one table, with an Order By clause on the tables primary key: - SELECT TOP (100) PERCENT GDQid, GDQUser, GDQGED, GDQOption, gdqTotalLines, GDQTotalIndi, GDQRestart, GDQCheckpointMessage, GDQStarted, GDQFinished, gdqCheckpointRecordCountr FROM dbo.GEDQueue ORDER BY GDQid DESC If I right-click the view (from Management Studio's Object Explorer pane), select Design from the menu to show the view's design, and then click the Execute SQL icon, the view's results are displayed perfectly, in descending order of GDQid. However, if I select "Open View" the view's results are displayed out of order. When I do this with the SQL 2000 database, both Design/Execute and Open View correctly display the data in the correct order. Is there something that I should check in the SQL 2005 installation - some option that has been set incorrectly? Regards, Robert Barnes
