Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread Steven Roussey
| > Does that even make sense? "records 30 - 45" has no meaning, given | > that the server is free to return records in any order it pleases. | | a select query issued on a table with an autoincremented field and no ORDER | clause seems to default to having it's results returned in order of the |

RE: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread Paul DuBois
At 20:48 +0100 3/30/02, Roger Baklund wrote: >* Paul DuBois >> At 13:06 -0800 3/30/02, destr0 wrote: >> >a select query issued on a table with an autoincremented field >> and no ORDER >> >clause seems to default to having it's results returned in order of the >> >autoincremented field, ASC.

RE: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread Roger Baklund
* Paul DuBois > At 13:06 -0800 3/30/02, destr0 wrote: > >a select query issued on a table with an autoincremented field > and no ORDER > >clause seems to default to having it's results returned in order of the > >autoincremented field, ASC. I was saying "records 30 - 45" in terms of > >that. >

Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread Paul DuBois
At 13:06 -0800 3/30/02, destr0 wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Paul DuBois" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "destr0" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 10:36 AM >Subject: Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema >

Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread destr0
- Original Message - From: "Paul DuBois" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "destr0" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 10:36 AM Subject: Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema > Does that even make sense? "records 30 - 45"

Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread Paul DuBois
At 12:22 -0800 3/30/02, destr0 wrote: >- Original Message - >From: "Tyler Longren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "destr0" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 9:38 AM >Subject: Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema >

Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread destr0
- Original Message - From: "Tyler Longren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "destr0" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 9:38 AM Subject: Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema > You have to have the LIMIT clause after the ORDER clau

Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread Paul DuBois
At 11:32 -0800 3/30/02, destr0 wrote: >Can you not have the LIMIT clause before the ORDER Clause in a select query? > >SELECT * FROM myTable LIMIT 30, 45 ORDER BY someField ASC; > >This query ^ fails with the error: > >Error 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near ' ORDER BY someField >AS

Re: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema

2002-03-30 Thread Tyler Longren
You have to have the LIMIT clause after the ORDER clause. Tyler Longren Captain Jack Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.captainjack.com - Original Message - From: "destr0" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 1:32 PM Subject: LIMIT, ORDER Dilema