I'm finding that the results are the same for all 3 queries regardless of the input parameters and, as far as I can see, logically they should be.

SSCrazy, Can you...

Hi SSCrazy,

Thanks for your input.

Actually, I didn't say that I don't like performance written code what I am getting at is that performance is not the only consideration, sacrificing a...

I think a lot of people seem to focus purely on performance, a good solution to a given issue considers many factors, NOT just performance, people who focus on just...

Yet another way to skin the cat, using a PIVOT this time, not as quick as the others but returns the counts of each product, sometimes you want to know...

Hey Ben,

Sorry, not disrespecting your data structure, just trying to highlight that the results for ROWS/RANGE would always be the same

in the situation where the column in the ORDER...

WayneS is still absolutely correct about the usage of ROWS though.

In this instance you should use ROWS because it is the more correct solution for what you are doing,...

Thanks WayneS, read your article, I was looking for a good description of the difference between ROW and RANGE. Yes, most definitely ROW should be used here.

Interesting, so in the...

Hey Ben,

Speaking of SQL 2012 and using "PARTITION OVER" have you tried specifying the rows relative to the current one and avoiding the UPDATE statement completely?

This will return the same...