Odd Man Out

Question

Odd Man Out

ksatpute123

Hall of Fame

Points: 3325
More actions
November 19, 2014 at 8:23 pm

#313270

Comments posted to this topic are about the item Odd Man Out
November 20, 2014 at 1:27 am

This was removed by the editor as SPAM

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 30 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Raghavendra Mudugal SSChampion Points: 10658 More actions · Answer 1

Thank you for the post, good one. My knowledge came back after selecting the wrong answer 🙂

ww; Raghu
--
The first and the hardest SQL statement I have wrote- "select * from customers" - and I was happy and felt smart.

Koen Verbeeck SSC Guru Points: 259105 More actions · Answer 2

I'd argue ROWCOUNT_BIG is an odd one as well, as it is not calculated over the current result set, but over the results of a previous query.

Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

Louis Hillebrand SSCarpal Tunnel Points: 4982 More actions · Answer 3

ROWCOUNT_BIG returns the number of rows affected by the last statement all the others return values in the result set itself (Aggregate or sequential)..

for me ROWCOUNT_BIG was the odd one in this list.

serg-52 SSCrazy Eights Points: 9913 More actions · Answer 4

Koen Verbeeck (11/20/2014)
I'd argue ROWCOUNT_BIG is an odd one as well, as it is not calculated over the current result set, but over the results of a previous query.

+1

And note BOL doesn't list @@ROWCOUNT, ROWCOUNT_BIG() among aggregates.

Koen Verbeeck SSC Guru Points: 259105 More actions · Answer 5

serg-52 (11/20/2014)
Koen Verbeeck (11/20/2014)
I'd argue ROWCOUNT_BIG is an odd one as well, as it is not calculated over the current result set, but over the results of a previous query.
+1
And note BOL doesn't list @@ROWCOUNT, ROWCOUNT_BIG() among aggregates.

It does in the 2008R2 version of that MSDN page.

So apparently MS realized it is a mistake to list ROWCOUNT_BIG as an aggregate.

Hence, the "correct" answer of this question is based on a mistake MS made 4 years ago.

Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

Carlo Romagnano SSC-Insane Points: 22670 More actions · Answer 6

ROWCOUNT_BIG() differs from @@rowcount only from the type.

So, ROWCOUNT_BIG() is the correct answer. All other functions may be followed by the OVER clause.

ksatpute123 Hall of Fame Points: 3325 More actions · Answer 7

I sure did a smart thing by adding the SQL SERVER 2008 R2 reference. Once again the question section works for me not in form of answers but the discussion that follows.

ksatpute123 Hall of Fame Points: 3325 More actions · Answer 8

Stewart "Arturius" Campbell (11/20/2014)
I think this is going to be an interesting discussion.
All in good fun, anyway:-P

+1

vivekjamshedpur Right there with Babe Points: 740 More actions · Answer 9

I strongly think that ROWCOUNT_BIG is Odd man out here :alien:

Toreador SSChampion Points: 11365 More actions · Answer 10

GROUPING_ID was introduced in SQL2008. The others were all available in SQL2005.

Koen Verbeeck SSC Guru Points: 259105 More actions · Answer 11

Toreador (11/20/2014)
GROUPING_ID was introduced in SQL2008. The others were all available in SQL2005.

And VARP is the only function with a name less than 5 characters! :w00t: 😎 :hehe:

Need an answer? No, you need a question
My blog at https://sqlkover.com.
MCSE Business Intelligence - Microsoft Data Platform MVP

Ed Wagner SSC Guru Points: 287026 More actions · Answer 12

As others have pointed out, there are other differences. I was hoping that the functional difference I noticed was the one he was looking for. In any even, the discussion could get lively.

Tally Tables - Performance Personified
String Splitting with True Performance
Best practices on how to ask questions

tom.w.brannon Hall of Fame Points: 3976 More actions · Answer 13

tom.w.brannon

Hall of Fame

Points: 3976

November 20, 2014 at 5:49 am

#1759798

Agreed