sql-order-by

The following basic LINQ to SQL statement does not result in the orderby working. As you can see in the T-SQL there is no orderby. Do you know why? LINQ to SQL: var results = (from stats in db.t_harvest_statistics orderby stats.unit_number select stats.unit_number).Distinct().ToList(); Above Results in following TSQL SELECT [Distinct1].[unit_number] AS [unit_number] FROM ( SELECT DISTINCT [Extent1].[unit_number] AS [unit_number] FROM [dbo].[t_harvest_statistics] AS [Extent1] ) AS [Distinct1] That is a limitation of SQL and Relational Algebra of where the ORDER BY is in relation to the DISTINCT

Short Question What is the default order of a list returned from a Django filter call when connected to a PostgreSQL database? Background By my own admission, I had made a poor assumption at the application layer in that the order in which a list is returned will be constant, that is without using 'order_by'. The list of items I was querying is not in alphabetic order or any other deliberate order. It was thought to remain in the same order as which they were added to the database. This assumption held true for hundreds of queries, but a failure was reported by my application when the order

We would like to use a parameter in the "Order By" clause of a query or stored procedure created with the Visual Studio DataSet Designer. Example: FROM TableName WHERE (Forename LIKE '%' + @SearchValue + '%') OR (Surname LIKE '%' + @SearchValue + '%') OR (@SearchValue = 'ALL') ORDER BY @OrderByColumn This error is displayed: Variables are only allowed when ordering by an expression referencing a column name. You should be able to do something like this: SELECT * FROM TableName WHERE (Forename LIKE '%' + @SearchValue + '%') OR (Surname LIKE '%' + @SearchValue + '%') OR (@SearchValue = 'ALL')

I have a query ordered by column : select * from mytable order by column asc — sort table column type is varchar, so the output is: 1 10 100 11 12 13 How should I sort if I want them to sort by numeric value so the output is: 1 10 11 12 13 100 Use: order by cast(column as unsigned) asc You can use this if you want to treat column as INT only: SELECT * FROM mytable ORDER BY column+0; 1 10 11 12 13 100 Or this if you want to treat column as both INT and VARCHAR SELECT * FROM mytable ORDER BY column+0, column; #this will sort the column by VARCHAR first and then sort it by INT abc xyz 1 10 11 12

There is a field 'noticeBy' enum('email','mobile','all','auto','nothing') NOT NULL DEFAULT 'auto'. As it known ordering by ENUM field performs relative to its index. However, how it possible make order by its values? As documented under Sorting : ENUM values are sorted based on their index numbers, which depend on the order in which the enumeration members were listed in the column specification. For example, 'b' sorts before 'a' for ENUM('b', 'a') . The empty string sorts before nonempty strings, and NULL values sort before all other enumeration values. To prevent unexpected results when

i have a table like this: name date time tom | 2011-07-04 | 01:09:52 tom | 2011-07-04 | 01:09:52 mad | 2011-07-04 | 02:10:53 mad | 2009-06-03 | 00:01:01 i want oldest name first: SELECT * ORDER BY date ASC, time ASC GROUP BY name (->doesn't work!) now it should give me first mad(has earlier date) then tom but with GROUP BY name ORDER BY date ASC, time ASC gives me the newer mad first because it groups before it sorts! again: the problem is that i can't sort by date and time before i group because GROUP BY must be before ORDER BY! Another method: SELECT * FROM ( SELECT * ORDER BY date ASC, time

Is it possible to define a sort order for the returned results? I would like the sort order to be 'orange' 'apple' 'strawberry' not ascending or descending. I know ORDER BY can do ASC or DESC but is there a DEFINED('orange', 'apple', 'strawberry') type thing? This will be running on SQL Server 2000. It's incredibly clunky, but you can use a CASE statement for ordering: SELECT * FROM Blah ORDER BY CASE MyColumn WHEN 'orange' THEN 1 WHEN 'apple' THEN 2 WHEN 'strawberry' THEN 3 END Alternately, you can create a secondary table which contains the sort field and a sort order. TargetValue SortOrder