Mark Stanton wrote: >> Out of memory I could say that when you have 10 or 20 fields in >> your output but the group by is by 4 or 5 of them, then using max() >> will give you more readable code > > Hmmm, I have to say I'm with Ed on this, "max" of something non- > numeric looks odd to my eyes.
Had the same feeling when I started coding SQL statements in SQLServer (same behavior), the only way I found to do what I wanted without writing long group statements was the aforementioned. OTOH if you 'know' the field values are the same then it should probably belong in other table (not sure about this). Of course this does not apply if the data does not 'belong' to you (sigh..). > > Mark > > > _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
