Alan wrote:
> "Michel Cadot" <micadot{at}altern{dot}org> wrote in message
> news:411247af$0$1888$636a15ce_at_news.free.fr...
>
>>"Alan" <alan_at_erols.com> a icrit dans le message de
>
> news:2nesn5F53etU1_at_uni-berlin.de...
>
>>>"Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
>>>news:1091677677.736929_at_yasure...
>>>
>>>>Peter Plumber wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>Does Qracle 9i support a SELECT that returns
>>>>>only a subset of the records
>>>>>
>>>>>something link
>>>>>
>>>>>SELECT FIRST 1 * FROM tablename
>>>>>
>>>>>thx
>>>>>
>>>>>Peter
>>>>
>>>>Have to confess that I am really disappointed with the responses from
>>>>Michel, Hans, Rene, and Turkbear because not one gave the answer I
>>>>was going to give. And I was sure as I read through theirs that one or
>>>>all of them would have done it first ... so here's mine:
>>>>
>>>>CREATE TABLE t AS
>>>>SELECT object_name
>>>>FROM all_objects
>>>>WHERE rownum < 81;
>>>>
>>>>SELECT COUNT(*)
>>>>FROM t;
>>>>
>>>>SELECT *
>>>>FROM t
>>>>SAMPLE (25);
>>>>
>>>>Returns 25% of the rows.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Daniel A. Morgan
>>>>University of Washington
>>>>damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
>>>>(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
>>>>
>>>
>>>I am disapopinted with all of you. The correct answer is, "There is no
>
> such
>
>>>thing as "first", as tables are (unordered) sets. So, what is it you
>>>_really_ need to do?"
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Sorry to disagree with you but there is always "first" even when there is
>
> no order.
>
>>At least it the first ones to be displayed whichever these rows may be.
>>And from which Daniel's not so bad answer ;) as first ones may be any ones
>
> else.
>
>>--
>>Regards
>>Michel Cadot
>>
>>
>
>
> Of course there is an ordinal first, but it has no special meaning, and may
> be misleading, depending on what the user really wants. The reason we store
> data is to answer questions posed by those concerned with the "business"
> information stored in the database. Therefore, it is mandatory to know what
> question is really being asked of the data. I stand by my answer.
Once again ... the OP did not ask for the first record. Go reread the
original post. The FIRST is a red herring.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)
Received on Thu Aug 05 2004 - 21:42:34 CDT
