SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


SQL 2005 for the SQL2K Developer Part 2


SQL 2005 for the SQL2K Developer Part 2

Author
Message
Muhammad Choirul Amri
Muhammad Choirul Amri
Grasshopper
Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 21 Visits: 25
Comments posted to this topic are about the content posted at http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/mcAmri/sql2005forthesql2kdeveloperpart2.asp
Mike C
Mike C
SSCrazy
SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 2739 Visits: 1168

Don't forget RANK(), DENSE_RANK() and NTILE(). See http://www.sqlservercentral.com/columnists/mcoles/sequentialordering.asp for more info. Also discusses other reasons IDENTITY column and other options are not optimal solutions.

Thanks.


Muhammad Choirul Amri
Muhammad Choirul Amri
Grasshopper
Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)Grasshopper (21 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 21 Visits: 25
Hi Mike C

thanks for remind for such cool sequential ordering
omhoge
omhoge
SSC Eights!
SSC Eights! (810 reputation)SSC Eights! (810 reputation)SSC Eights! (810 reputation)SSC Eights! (810 reputation)SSC Eights! (810 reputation)SSC Eights! (810 reputation)SSC Eights! (810 reputation)SSC Eights! (810 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 810 Visits: 183

You can get the old sample databases no longer included in 2005 here:

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=06616212-0356-46A0-8DA2-EEBC53A68034&displaylang=en#Instructions

hth



Skål - jh
rlively-343684
rlively-343684
Valued Member
Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 52 Visits: 52
Couldn't this same query:

UPDATE Products
SET UnitPrice = 0.9 * UnitPrice
WHERE ProductID IN
(
SELECT ProductID FROM(
SELECT ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY UnitPrice DESC) AS Number, ProductID FROM Products) AS B
WHERE Number < = 10
)

Be written in SQL2k (or SQL2005 for that matter) using TOP instead of ROW_NUMBER? This query even looks simpler and easier to understand:

UPDATE Products
SET UnitPrice = 0.9 * UnitPrice
WHERE ProductID IN
(
SELECT TOP 10 ProductID FROM Products
ORDER BY UnitPrice DESC
)
Mike C
Mike C
SSCrazy
SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 2739 Visits: 1168

What's more difficult is something like this:

UPDATE Products
SET UnitPrice = 0.9 * UnitPrice
WHERE ProductID IN
(
SELECT ProductID FROM(
SELECT ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY UnitPrice DESC) AS Number, ProductID FROM Products) AS B
WHERE Number % 10 = 0
)

Or

UPDATE Products
SET UnitPrice = 0.9 * UnitPrice
WHERE ProductID IN
(
SELECT ProductID FROM(
SELECT ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY UnitPrice DESC) AS Number, ProductID FROM Products) AS B
WHERE (Number >= 10 AND Number < 20)
OR (Number >= 50 AND Number < 60)
)


rlively-343684
rlively-343684
Valued Member
Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)Valued Member (52 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 52 Visits: 52
Are you saying that in the case of "discount the price for the top 10 most expensive products" that using TOP would indeed be a better choice, but for more complicated requirements ROW_NUMBER provides a valuable alternative to complicated queries?
Mike C
Mike C
SSCrazy
SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)SSCrazy (2.7K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 2739 Visits: 1168
Absolutely. The example given for the Top 10 was too simple to benefit (unless of course you're trying to port something to/from a system that does not support the TOP keyword). If you want to sample values from every 10th item, or need to grab the #s 11-20; or #s 31-40 (or combinations, etc.), ROW_NUMBER is much easier to use (and often considerably faster) than most alternatives. The alternatives often include a lot of complex self-joins to "number" the rows to achieve this same effect.
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search