On Fri, 2004-04-09 at 18:43, Greg Stark wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> 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
