Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On

Add to briefcase «««1011121314

Sort Order - Include Null al last Expand / Collapse
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:28 AM



Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 4:50 PM
Points: 23,515, Visits: 37,731

(aka smunson)

First, Steve probably hasn't seen this thread yet, as he may be off at a conference. I know that when he learns about an issue such as this, he takes the appropriate action and makes the necessary corrections and sends out his apologies. The constant complaining about not getting "my points back" over and over is whining. Do these points really mean anything? Does the fact you didn't get awarded a point really going to matter next week, or next year? Is it going to cost you your job? Come on, if we are all professionals, like we say we are, we need to step up and realize that things go wrong, and whining about it isn't going to make it better.

Yes, individuals like Jeff, Grant, Gail, et al preach do it right from the beginning. But I can assure you, they make mistakes as well. Part of that is called development, or experimentation. Has any one out there written the perfect nontrivial sql query/store procedure/trigger/... the first time they sat down to write it? Probably not. Sometimes the first iteration my be a slow ponderous beast that returns the correct answer. Now the goal is to improve the process, find the better solution before going into production. I'm sure that some of the guru's out there can do this faster than others (a matter of experience).

I also place the constant complaining about bad questions/answers as complaining. All I can say is it happens, get over it. We may not have the time to volunteer and vet questions, but how about stepping up to the plate and providing some QotD instead? Do I think I could do a better job than some of the others I have seen? Possibly, depends on what topic I would choose. I just haven't taken the time to try and write one. But there is another difference, I'm not one of those complaining about the bad questions/answers all the time. (No, I am just complaining about the complainers because that bothers me more than the bad questions/answers.)

I may, in the near future, try my hand at writing a QotD. I finally took the time to write an article for SSC (and it will be published shortly), and I am in the process of writing another one. I'm sure I will get some flames on my article, but I also know that others will provide valuable feedback (contractive criticism) which I will welcome.

Lynn Pettis

For better assistance in answering your questions, click here
For tips to get better help with Performance Problems, click here
For Running Totals and its variations, click here or when working with partitioned tables
For more about Tally Tables, click here
For more about Cross Tabs and Pivots, click here and here
Managing Transaction Logs

SQL Musings from the Desert Fountain Valley SQL (My Mirror Blog)
Post #523538
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:59 PM


Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 11:24 AM
Points: 2,678, Visits: 3,542
I hear you Lynn... I just think we're clashing on a difference of either specific values or perspective. My values say that if I were going to run SSC, I could not and would not accept a QOTD that wasn't reviewed and vetted by several other people beyond the author, and those doing the vetting wouldn't be able to participate in any QOTD they vetted. The vetters would likely include several of the best site participants, and I would hope for a pool of vetters such that I could rotate among different sets of vetters for each QOTD. It's also quite likely I would make that process weekly instead of daily, as daily deadlines are very difficult to meet with just one person involved, never mind a larger pool.

My perspective says I simply can't imagine implementing anything like QOTD in any way that was WITHOUT the caveats I specified above, nor can I imagine anyone else being willing to do so without them, as the whining and complaining that would certainly ensue would only hurt the site's reputation, and I cannot see any way to make up for that kind of a loss that makes doing a QOTD type of thing worth the effort. This is primarily because I would know ahead of time the kind of grief involved in having to fix problems and listen to gripes and whines, AND, that just setting up the coding on who could participate in any given question would not be trivial. Again, just my perspective. Besides, my mother always told me that if you're going to do something, do it well. My version of "do it well" requires more effort than others might envision, but I know from experience that it tends to produce good results.

(aka smunson)

(aka sgmunson)

Health & Nutrition
Post #523645
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2008 1:15 PM


Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, May 11, 2009 7:36 AM
Points: 140, Visits: 99
Seriously guys, I can't believe you are all talking about this still. I think its time to move on. There are more fun and exciting things going on in the SQL Server world. :D
Post #523656
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:41 PM



Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 12:35 PM
Points: 34,363, Visits: 18,578
Points are awarded back.

Apologies for the delay. I was on vacation and this was one thing that no one else knows how to do (yet).

The run through of the question appeared to be correct, but I think I, like the author, was watching the date fields only and not the text fields. No excuse, but mistakes happen.

Also, the single quotes are sometimes a result of the #$%$@#@ editor used. It changes proper SQL single quotes to grammatically correct ones that don't work in QA. Please ignore those.

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #523736
Posted Wednesday, June 25, 2008 10:40 PM


Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 3:23 AM
Points: 6,049, Visits: 1,407
Cheers to Steve.........:)

I believe u are not going to deduct points for posting here ;)

Post #523854
Posted Thursday, June 26, 2008 12:55 AM

Ten Centuries

Ten CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen CenturiesTen Centuries

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 9:46 AM
Points: 1,055, Visits: 3,062
Anirban Paul (6/25/2008)
Cheers to Steve.........:)

I believe u are not going to deduct points for posting here ;)

Now that's an idea......

Semper in excretia, sumus solum profundum variat
Post #523903
Posted Sunday, July 6, 2008 11:24 PM
Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, July 6, 2008 11:46 PM
Points: 376, Visits: 12
The given answer here is wrong which is not displaying the dateofleaving in ascending order.

I think the correct answer is,

select * from employees
order by dateofleaving desc,empname asc
Post #529050
Posted Tuesday, November 25, 2008 9:24 AM
SSC Eights!

SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!SSC Eights!

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Thursday, November 10, 2016 8:05 AM
Points: 819, Visits: 164
Just because I a bit of a newbie with SQL in general. I created the table and poplulated. Verified I had the right value and in SQL Server 2005 the statment 'SELECT EmpName, DateOfLeaving from #Employees ORDER BY DateOfLeaving DESC, EmpName ASC' got the correct answer.

I did not try the supposed solution.

Post #608464
Posted Monday, March 16, 2009 1:31 AM


Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, June 6, 2016 12:47 AM
Points: 2,422, Visits: 221
Hi All

I have tested the query by creating the table.

Select EmpName, DateOfLeaving from Employees order by DateOfLeaving desc, EmpName asc

Only the above statement will return the required output.

3rd option is the correct , not the 2nd option.
Post #676299
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««1011121314

Permissions Expand / Collapse