I think there is two limitations: - Number of column: 5 - Number of bytes: 255
Peter Horsbøll Møller GIS Developer, MTM Geographical Information & IT COWI A/S Odensevej 95 DK-5260 Odense S. Denmark Tel +45 6311 4900 Direct +45 6311 4908 Mob +45 5156 1045 Fax +45 6311 4949 E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.cowi.dk/gis COWI har fået ny hjemmeside. Ydelserne GIS og IT, kort, kortlægning, 3D visualisering og arealforvaltning ligger under SAMFUND. Se mere her : www.cowi.dk COWI has changed its homepage. Our services within cadastre and landadministration, geodataproducts, mapping and GIS can be seen under SOCIETY. See our services here: www.cowi.com -----Original Message----- From: Brad Sharkey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 12:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: MI-L Limitation in ORDER BY Clause Hi all, My BIG question is...is it the field types (eg. char width), or the number of fields being used in the sort? ...I had a problem sorting by three(3) columns the other day, so I wrote a fairly simple MBX to first split the table on one field into separate queries (Queries were ordered by the other two cols which did work ok), then appended them all back together...so the initial split gave me the first col sort (separation in order by group by query). The split queries were sorted by the other two fields. I'm happy to give anyone the code if they want, it might be simpler to explain that way. I made it kinda flexible? -- Brad Sharkey GIS/Mapping Contractor mob: 0438 805533 --------------------------------------------------------------------- List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com | To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message number: 18533 --------------------------------------------------------------------- List hosting provided by Directions Magazine | www.directionsmag.com | To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message number: 18534
