> >>Please note that the SQL standard does not prohibid stable sorting
> >>outcome.
> >
> >It does prohibit it. It states the output is not sorted unless
> >you ask for it to be.
> >
> May I ask, are you a lawyer?
No. As a programmer you must be just as vigilant about following
the rules as a lawy
Jay wrote:
OK, there is no requirement, but there is a wish to return a stable
sorting outcome.
Just add an 'order by' clause.
Please note that the SQL standard does not prohibid stable sorting
outcome.
It does prohibit it. It states the output is not sorted unless
you ask for it to be
>
> OK, there is no requirement, but there is a wish to return a stable
> sorting outcome.
Just add an 'order by' clause.
> Please note that the SQL standard does not prohibid stable sorting
> outcome.
It does prohibit it. It states the output is not sorted unless
you ask for it to be.
> Plea
Eric Bohlman wrote:
Shum [Ming Yik] wrote:
Actually Sqlite same as other SQL in return order such as sample (1)
( it seems follow the insert order when no specific order by ... )
But Sqlite break the rule (may be it is not a rule), when part of the
whole
Order by string passing into the select s
Shum [Ming Yik] wrote:
Actually Sqlite same as other SQL in return order such as sample (1)
( it seems follow the insert order when no specific order by ... )
But Sqlite break the rule (may be it is not a rule), when part of the whole
Order by string passing into the select statement ... as samp
a same way ?
I meams:
1.) both in (descending order )
or
2.) both in ( ascending order)
Shum
www.mingyik.com
- Original Message -
From: "Robert Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 4:02 AM
Subject: RE: [sqlite] Quoestion on Order By ... ?
-
> -Original Message-
> From: Shum [Ming Yik] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 12:22 PM
> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Quoestion on Order By ... ?
>
> Hi Scott Baker,
>
> In other SQL ... mySQL, PostgreSQL, MS
> >> Not necessarily. All you're telling it to do is sort on the first
> >> column, anything beyond that is just random luck. You could easily
> >> sort it on both columns.
I think the sql standard says "If you don't specify an order then
there is no guaranteed order". It's usually table order, b
;
> To:
> Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:13 AM
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Quoestion on Order By ... ?
>
>
>> Not necessarily. All you're telling it to do is sort on the first
>> column, anything beyond that is just random luck. You could easily
>> sort it on both
ROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 3:13 AM
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Quoestion on Order By ... ?
Not necessarily. All you're telling it to do is sort on the first
column, anything beyond that is just random luck. You could easily
sort it on both columns.
ORDER BY XIVONO, XICODE;
Shum
Not necessarily. All you're telling it to do is sort on the first
column, anything beyond that is just random luck. You could easily
sort it on both columns.
ORDER BY XIVONO, XICODE;
Shum [Ming Yik] wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have problem with Order by ...:
>
> There is a table as follow: mytbl01
Hi All,
I have problem with Order by ...:
There is a table as follow: mytbl01
XIVONO XICODE XCNT
X001 001 1
X001 002 2
X001 003 3
X001 004 4
1.) SELECT
12 matches
Mail list logo
