March 12, 2010 at 1:27 am
Good question. This was really a mind teaser. Never thought of doing a COUNT for two tables.
March 12, 2010 at 6:45 am
Well I learned something today. I had no idea you could produce a cross join in that manner.
March 15, 2010 at 11:19 am
Well, I guessed that it would cross join and got lucky 🙂
Now I have a new way to do cross joins! Can't wait to kill my server with that one...
Peter Trast
Microsoft Certified ...(insert many literal strings here)
Microsoft Design Architect with Alexander Open Systems
March 30, 2010 at 8:12 am
Amazing that so many people are unaware of the syntax. Especially since it pre-dates the CROSS JOIN form.
Paul White
SQLPerformance.com
SQLkiwi blog
@SQL_Kiwi
March 31, 2010 at 9:27 am
I tried the following statement on some existing tables
select count(*)
from table1, table2
to verify the results of the question. As it turns out, with my data set, the query returns the "Arithmetic overflow error converting expression to data type int".
It should be noted, that depending on your record sets, the count(*) should be replaced with count_big(*) to give the you the correct results.
March 31, 2010 at 9:34 am
timothy.g.parker (3/31/2010)
It should be noted, that depending on your record sets, the count(*) should be replaced with count_big(*) to give the you the correct results.
Ever wonder why there's no SUM_BIG?
Paul White
SQLPerformance.com
SQLkiwi blog
@SQL_Kiwi
Viewing 6 posts - 16 through 20 (of 20 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply