RE: [sqlite] order by issue?

> -Original Message- > From: Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 4:10 PM > To: sqlite > Subject: [sqlite] order by issue? > > I'm not sure if this a bug or if working as intended: > > the order by b,a seems to cause B to use asc.. Instead of the desc as > wri

RE: [sqlite] order by issue?

Unless I don't know SQL, the results look correct. Anyone chime in to correct me. Your query: select * from tst order by b, a desc; Is really: select * from tst order by b ASC, a desc; So, if you look at the rows from top to bottom, you'll see that for each value of 'b' in ascending order, you

RE: [sqlite] order by issue?

James thats indeed the result expected. I'll add the additional desc. I errantly assumed the desc applied to both columns and the the entire result would be ordered desc. But I see now the error of my ways. Thanks, Ken James Dennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -Original Message- > Fr

Re: [sqlite] order by issue?

Ken wrote: the order by b,a seems to cause B to use asc.. Instead of the desc as written in the order by statement. Ken, You would need to say order by b desc, a desc to get the behaviour you expect. HTH Dennis Cote ---

Re: [sqlite] order by issue?

Ken wrote: I'm not sure if this a bug or if working as intended: the order by b,a seems to cause B to use asc.. Instead of the desc as written in the order by statement. create table tst (a integer, b integer ); sqlite> insert into tst values(1,1); sqlite> insert into tst values(1,2); sqlite

Re: [sqlite] ORDER BY issue v3.8.2 amalgamtion

On 1 Feb 2014, at 3:53am, Labar, Ken wrote: > Upgrading from 3.7.14.1 to 3.8.2 our previously sorted queries are no > longer sorted. > Testing this same database with the win7 binary 3.8.2 the query is correctly > sorted. Does your query include an ORDER BY clause ? If not, then you cannot

Re: [sqlite] ORDER BY issue v3.8.2 amalgamtion

Hello Simon, Below is the query, and the schema I’m trying to debug. FYI: I’m signed up for the daily digest, so please CC kla...@hach.com on replies for a faster response. CREATE TABLE userParameter ( hepi_parameter_id INT NOT NULL ,hepi_c

Re: [sqlite] ORDER BY issue v3.8.2 amalgamtion

On 3 Feb 2014, at 4:58am, Labar, Ken wrote: > select (rtTableSort < 1000) as selected, abbrString from userParameter order > by abbrString; > > > This used to work until we upgraded sqlite to v3.8.2. It still does work at > the PC level. Thanks for test data and SELECT command, which allo

Re: [sqlite] ORDER BY issue v3.8.2 amalgamtion

Labar, Ken wrote: > [...] > select (rtTableSort < 1000) as selected, abbrString from userParameter order > by abbrString; > > This used to work until we upgraded sqlite to v3.8.2. It still does work at > the PC level. What is the EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN output for this query on the handheld? When it

Re: [sqlite] ORDER BY issue v3.8.2 amalgamtion

On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Labar, Ken wrote: > > > > This used to work until we upgraded sqlite to v3.8.2. It still does work at the PC level. And earlier: > - IAR C compiler Can you try recompiling with all compiler optimizations turned off and see if you still get the error?

Re: [sqlite] ORDER BY issue v3.8.2 amalgamtion

Hello Simon, Clemens, and Richard, Thank you for your help. > Simon: "What are you seeing from your SELECT that you weren't expecting ?" 0 | Batt 0 | ClockBatt 0 | Batt 0 | BP 0 | ORP 0 | Ref 0 | pH 0 | pH 0 | DO ... > Simon: "Can you reduce your INSERTs to just two rows, and still get results

Re: [sqlite] ORDER BY issue v3.8.2 amalgamtion

Federal University Oye Ekiti conduct Third Matriculation this February visit http://www.fuoye.edu.ng for more details -- View this message in context: http://sqlite.1065341.n5.nabble.com/ORDER-BY-issue-v3-8-2-amalgamtion-tp73605p73704.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.co