Yes but in that case it would make no sense to use an "ordered" view even if such a thing were possible. I don't know what that's all about.Reply Fabricio Lima August 24, 2010 5:26 amThis post is the answer for a question that I received today. If you are as knowledgeable about T-SQL as you're representing then you know exactly why I had to use SELECT TOP 100 PERCENT. I never knew that ordering a view was unsupported. http://gnumatic.com/order-by/order-by-not-working-in-view.html
In fact, the correct design will imply the same. order by share|improve this answer answered Dec 16 '15 at 20:34 NasF1 1 Why not just SELECT TOP 100 PERCENT ... ? –Max Vernon Dec 16 '15 at 21:08 Thank you,it solved my problemReplyLeave a Reply Cancel reply Pinal Dave is a technology enthusiast and an independent consultant. All rights reserved. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15187676/create-a-view-with-order-by-clause
I just didn't agree that the ability to retrieve an ordered set from a real-world tool was an unforgiveable sin against the theoretical definition of the view. Then, have the tool be a sport when it returns its own result set and apply the ordering to the result set. hope to get reply from Mr. The Best SQL Server Web Links: tips, tutorials, scripts, and more.
As always your comment is to the point!Kind Regards, PinalReply PRO August 30, 2013 11:31 pmI used row_number over() (order by column name) in the view and that worked for me. Order By In View Sql Server 2008 Let us check the count of the rows in original table and Views.-- Match the counts
SELECT COUNT(*) ViewCount
On occasion I have had to write a view in MS SQL server (currently 2005) and in the view I have wanted to order the results - but if you try http://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/21434/why-does-order-by-not-belong-in-a-view SQL Server has optimized them away completely.
Thanks for the very detailed replies. Sql Server Order By Not Working Anonymous Books Online has everything you need to know: “When ORDER BY is used in the definition of a view, inline function, derived table, or subquery, the clause is used only And you're absolutely right, it's nothing compared to rewriting everything as stored procedures etc etc etc. When it comes to measuring the cost of a data breach, size matters.
Results of queries are ordered for display in the client application; rows in views and tables are unordered. –sqlvogel Mar 3 '13 at 16:41 What exactly do you expect There are also a couple of SO questions already about that subject. –Blaž Dakskobler Jun 3 '14 at 0:04 add a comment| Your Answer draft saved draft discarded Sign up Sql Order By View Do you have a substantive reason for why I shouldn't be explicit about where I'm selecting my data from? Order By In View Oracle What happens when items are discontinued?
Have an SQL Server tip to offer your fellow DBA's and developers? Submit Your password has been sent to: By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. So what is the solution? have a peek here I like it.
The advantage of following standards is that you can escape the contigous files/ contigous records physical model for MUCH better implementations, parallelism, etc. Why We Can't Use Order By Clause In View The solution is: SELECT * FROM vwRouteReference ORDER BY numb ; Don't use "SELECT *" in real code. current community chat Stack Overflow Meta Stack Overflow your communities Sign up or log in to customize your list.
When ORDER BY is used in these objects, the clause is used only to determine the rows returned by the TOP clause or OFFSET and FETCH clauses. Jan 31 '06 #22 P: n/a David Portas Beowulf wrote: Unfortunately, I have a large number of views that need to be joined with physical tables and other views. A VIEW with an ordering is absurd; a VIEW is a table and **by definition** has no ordering. Sql Server View Order By Top 100 Percent The optimizer will consider rewrites that invalidates this assumption.
http://www.csee.umbc.edu/help/oracle...a67775/ch5.htm Refresh on commit, as opposed to refresh as part of every DML statement, as SQL Server does, is also in some cases better, as locks on MV are held for A table in and of itself does not have an order. Coming from Acess, I expect to be able to have views be ordered if I include an ORDER BY clause. Check This Out No problem!