October 2, 2009 at 2:13 am
I reckon this thread has pretty much said all it's going to :doze: Credit to the QOD author; fair point to (some of) the criticisms; let's call it a day.
October 2, 2009 at 2:17 am
bitbucket-25253 (10/1/2009)
the question was designed to bring attention to the subtle changes made between 2005 and 2008. Too many people fixated on the word (subclauses) and not enough paid attention to the word extensions, which is at the heart of the question.
I wasn't concentrating on the word 'extensions' but on the phrase 'GROUP BY clause'. Since GROUPING_ID() cannot be used within that clause, it is clearly not an extension to it, and that answer must be wrong.
However, the question clearly succeeded in its aim of bringing this functionality to people's attention, so well done 🙂
October 2, 2009 at 6:31 am
Fair point Bitbucket and I agree with you about everyone now knowing about the changes to Cube and Rollup. I do disagree with your end line of:
"If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked something"
Maybe if everything is going well, you have done you due diligence and planned accordingly. Kind of like the glass half full outlook. 🙂
October 2, 2009 at 7:05 am
I didn't know that CUBE and ROLLUP were non-standard in 2005 but are different in 2008. That's good; I've learned something.
Also, if Itzik says that something about SQL Server is true, and you disagree, you are almost certainly wrong. Itzik knows everything.
October 2, 2009 at 8:17 am
david.wright-948385
Darn good idea ....
Steve Vassallo
I do disagree with your end line of:
"If everything seems to be going well, you have obviously overlooked something"
Maybe if everything is going well, you have done you due diligence and planned accordingly. Kind of like the glass half full outlook
Steve - it is that empty half of glass that concerns me more than the full half.
October 2, 2009 at 10:11 am
I am greatful everyday for the new things I learn. They help to keep me employed.
--
KevinC.
October 2, 2009 at 5:03 pm
I am fuly agree that the answer is incorrect
Bcz Grouping_id is not a sub-clause, It is more like a function/aggregate
Group by subclauses listed at the following
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms177673.aspx this url did not list Grouping_ID as a sub_clause.
October 4, 2009 at 10:38 pm
The question did seem unnecessarily ambiguous: "Check all that apply:" hardly tells us whether we are supposed to check al features or just the new features.
[font="Times New Roman"]-- RBarryYoung[/font], [font="Times New Roman"] (302)375-0451[/font] blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung[font="Arial Black"]
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. [/font][font="Verdana"] "Performance is our middle name."[/font]
October 5, 2009 at 7:22 am
Steve Vassallo (10/1/2009)
I would have to think the question if faulty in some way when close to 85% of the people answering it are getting it wrong.. IN my time here this is one of the most lopsided correct/incorrect percentage
In my time here, regardless of the ratio of correct answers, I think the most useful (non-faulty) QotD's are the ones that run to 4 or 5 pages and invoke some sort of debate.
Yes I got it wrong as I tried to overthink it, and while I'm heartbroken my run has been broken again (;-)), I now know something concrete that was quite vague an hour ago!
--------
[font="Tahoma"]I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by. -Douglas Adams[/font]
October 5, 2009 at 8:25 am
This was removed by the editor as SPAM
October 5, 2009 at 8:37 am
Rob Goddard
I now know something concrete that was quite vague an hour ago!
stewartc-708166
It has highlighted an area that most people only had a vague appreciation for. well done and thanks
Thank you .... composing QODs is not exactly an easy task and your comments have made me feel my efforts were worthwhile.
Again Thanks
October 5, 2009 at 9:31 am
I do not agree with the question.
With rollup and with cube where available, so even if implementation have changed, it is not new.
The question was about added features.
A revision of a cpu is also no new cpu. When you make a function and you change it afterwards, I wouldn't say that it's a NEW function.
You're question should have been new or altered functionality then I would agree.
greets.
October 12, 2009 at 11:13 am
I agree with anyone saying that either the question or the answer is wrong.
October 13, 2009 at 8:11 am
This tricked me as well but I am going to investigate more on the answer based on what the others are saying.
Nice one though!!!
November 1, 2009 at 5:14 am
hodgy (10/1/2009)
Warren Gilbert (10/1/2009)
I am also of the opinion that the answer is incorrect.The question specifically asks for extensions (subclauses) to the GROUP BY clause.
GROUPING_ID is a function, NOT a sub-clause of the GROUP BY clause, and can only be used in the SELECT, HAVING and ORDER BY clauses.
i'm with you on this
Me too.
Tom
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 45 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply