Amit,
As far as I can tell, ORDER BY 1+3 will order the result set
by the value of the number 4. Rows with the smallest value
of 4 will appear first, and rows with the largest value of 4 will
appear last. ;)
The optimizer is able to recognize that 1+3 is constant,
and there is no sort in the query plan (in the cases I checked).
On the other hand, the optimizer does include a sort for
other constant expressions, such as ORDER BY PI() and
ORDER BY SIN(1), even though the query plan refers to
these values as ConstExpr instead of Expr.
Steve Kass
Drew University
[quoted text, click to view] Amit wrote:
>Hi,
>But if you see the "order by" clause, I'm not specifying "order by 1,3"
>which I understand, that would be ok (although not in this particular
>example because I only have two columns in the select list). I'm actually
>giving it an arithmetic operation (1+3) and it still doesn't complain.
>Thanks
>Amit
>
>
>"Greg Low [MVP]" <greglow@lowell.com.au> wrote in message
>news:%23ewiopaAFHA.3160@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>
>
>>Hi Amit,
>>
>>You can specify columns in the order by clause by number but most would
>>never consider it good practice. Use the column names instead.
>>
>>HTH,
>>
>>--
>>Greg Low [MVP]
>>MSDE Manager SQL Tools
>>
www.whitebearconsulting.com >>
>>"Amit" <remove.amitig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:uNATntXAFHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>>
>>
>>>This is for the Northwind database:
>>>
>>>select count(customerId), country
>>>from customers
>>>group by country
>>>order by 1+3
>>>
>>>How come this works? What does it mean to include an arithmetic
>>>
>>>
>operation
>
>
>>>in
>>>the Order By clause?
>>>Thanks
>>>Amit
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
