A rather complicated SQL query I was working on got me thinking about a limitation of (ANSI) SQL:
Is there a way to retrieve a record that is maximal or minimal with respect to an arbitrary ordering?
In other words:
Given a query like this:
SELECT * FROM mytable WHERE <various conditions> ORDER BY <order clause>
is it possible to write a query that returns only the first row (possibly by transforming the order clause into something else)?
I know you can do this using LIMIT (MySQL) / ROWNUM (Oracle) or similar, but that's not standard SQL.
I also know you can do this by fetching the max/min value you are interested in in a subquery (using MIN()/MAX()), then use that result as a criterion in your main SELECT, i.e.:
SELECT * FROM mytable WHERE <various conditions> AND myMaxColumn=(
SELECT MAX(myMaxColumn) FROM mytable WHERE <various conditions>
)
But that only works if I want to sort by a single column. I see no way to generalize this to multiple columns (other than nesting the above solution, but that would mean 2^n SELECTs when ordering by n coluns).
So is there a better way in standard SQL than nesting multiple subselects?
A related question is asked in Create a SQL query to retrieve most recent records. However, the answers there suggest either using LIMIT & friends, or to use a subquery with a MAX() as explained above, both of which are not solutions to my question.
SQL:2003
defines concept of window functions, one of which:
SELECT *
FROM (
SELECT *, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY col1, col2, col3) AS rn
FROM mytable
) q
WHERE rn = 1
will return you this first record.
As for now, it's supported by SQL Server
, Oracle
and since Jul 01, 2009
, by PostgreSQL 8.4
Note, however, that ROW_NUMBER()
in Oracle
is less efficient than the native way to limit records (i. e. ROWNUM
).
See this article in my blog for performance comparison:
ROW_NUMBER
vs. ROWNUM
SQL:2008
offers another clause to do this:
SELECT *
FROM mytable
ORDER BY
col1, col2, col3
FETCH FIRST 1 ROW ONLY
, but as for now, this exact syntax is supported by DB2
only (AFAIK
).
If I've understood you correctly, I think you're looking for the OVER clause, which enables you to partition result sets, defined as part of the ANSI SQL 2003 standard.
It's not very consistently implemented across RDBMS platforms.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With