On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 18:43, Greg Stark wrote: > Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Rod, > > > > > Something along the lines of the below would accomplish what you want > > > according to spec. ROW_NUMBER() is a spec defined function. (6.10 of > > > SQL200N) > > > > Great leaping little gods! They added something called "row number" to the > > spec? > > > > Boy howdy, folks were right ... the ANSI committee really has completly blown > > off the relational model completely. > > If it's like Oracle's rownum then it's the row number of the *output*, not the > position on disk. So it's not entirely blowing off the relational model any > more than ORDER BY does. > > The weird thing is the number of cases where you want ORDER BY or rownum > inside subselects. Which the solution to the original question needed.
It's not really like Oracles row num at all, though I suppose you can emulate rownum using it. The intention is that you will use it for "aggregates" like running totals, moving averages, counting, etc. http://www.devx.com/getHelpOn/10MinuteSolution/16573/1954?pf=true ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
