sorry about the flood...
this should have the limit/offset is None case fixed.
On 15/07/07, lei you <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> fixed a bug that exists if limit isn't specified.
>
> things should be fine now...
>
> On 15/07/07, lei you <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > the line
> >
> > orderby
fixed a bug that exists if limit isn't specified.
things should be fine now...
On 15/07/07, lei you <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> the line
>
> orderby = wrapper.order_by_clause = sql.ClauseList(*map(
> wrapper.corresponding_column, select.order_by_clause.clauses))
>
> should most be
>
> orderby
the line
orderby = wrapper.order_by_clause = sql.ClauseList(*map(
wrapper.corresponding_column, select.order_by_clause.clauses))
should most be
orderby = sql.ClauseList(*map(wrapper.corresponding_column,
select.order_by_clause.clauses))
not exactly sure why i did that...
new diff attached
On
what is sql generated for the proper fix?
attached is a patch that attempts the wrapper solution. (seems to work for
both union/non-union selects)
it basically does the following.
wrap the original select (be it union or not) in _msorg
if the original select has an order_by_clause,
adapt the
On Jul 14, 11:15 pm, "lei you" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # TODO: put a real copy-container on Select and copy, or somehow make this
> # not modify the Select statement
>
> In the above comments, are we referring to a solution where the original
> select statement is wrap inside another select
# TODO: put a real copy-container on Select and copy, or somehow make this
# not modify the Select statement
In the above comments, are we referring to a solution where the original
select statement is wrap inside another select statement where the actual
row_number function is applied?
On 15/07
Not exactly sure about what Valentin is doing there, will need to take a
look at the actual schema and data involved,
select distinct path, row_number() over (order by path desc) as ora_rn from
Block
row_number() is always distinct, therefore, the results returned by the
above query will include
On Jul 13, 2007, at 4:20 AM, lei you wrote:
> Thank you for the extremely speedy response :)
>
> Are we aware of any other impacts of oracle's offset+limit
> implication?
it has issues with DISTINCT as well. there is ticket #536 for this
which I spent some time with but not enough to under
Thank you for the extremely speedy response :)
Are we aware of any other impacts of oracle's offset+limit implication?
On 13/07/07, Michael Bayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Jul 13, 2007, at 4:07 AM, Esceo wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > attached is an experimental patch for mssql.py
On Jul 13, 2007, at 4:07 AM, Esceo wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> attached is an experimental patch for mssql.py merged with r2891:
>
> this is a direct steal from the oracle implementation of limit +
> offset using row_number()
>
> what I would like to find out are the following:
>
> the oracle impleme
Patch is attached again
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sqlalchemy" group.
To post to this group, send email to sqlalchemy@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECT
Hi all,
attached is an experimental patch for mssql.py merged with r2891:
this is a direct steal from the oracle implementation of limit +
offset using row_number()
what I would like to find out are the following:
the oracle implementation has visit_compound_select marked as todo,
what is the
Thank you all for looking into this - most appreciated!
On Jul 10, 6:13 pm, "Paul Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> if 2005 supports ROW_NUMBER() OVER ORDER BY like oracle does, then yes
>
> > this could be a possible feature enhancement.
>
> Another approach that occured to me is do
Hi,
if 2005 supports ROW_NUMBER() OVER ORDER BY like oracle does, then yes
> this could be a possible feature enhancement.
>
Another approach that occured to me is doing TOP (limit+offset) then seeking
the cursor. For server-side cursors this is probably nearly as efficient as
LIMIT/OFFSET.
I've
On Jul 10, 1:28 am, Philip Jenvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are a few different workarounds for the lack of offset in SQL
> Server, I recall a popular one being to nest your query in a couple
> SELECT TOPs, basically manually plucking the data out yourself.
>
> Though it looks like SQL
On Jul 9, 2007, at 9:37 PM, BruceC wrote:
>
> Hi all, I am using Pylons, & SQLAlchemy (via PYODBC) to connect
> through to an MSSQL database. In particular, I have been trying to use
> Christoph Haas' alternative Paginator (http://workaround.org/pylons/
> paginator/paginator.html) webhelper, whi
16 matches
Mail list logo
