Re: SQL row processing order for UDF

Dennis,

Any decent SQL based reporting tool, including SEQUEL, should be able
to calculate the running MTD column using the results of the basic
statement:

SELECT TRNDATE, AMOUNT
ORDER BY TRNDATE

If you really have to do it within the SQL statement itself and a CTE
can't be used....

What about a UDTF?

select * from table( MyMTDFunc(startDate, endDate) ) as tbl

Charles

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Dennis Lovelady <iseries@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I didn't, but that's a very good idea.

However, it's not a complete solution since some uses of this, against my
fervent complaints, will be implemented using the SEQUEL product, which has
no support for the WITH statement (among many other things).   Don't get me
started.

Any response to the "is it expected behavior" part?

Dennis Lovelady
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
--
Time is nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once.

did you try to use an CTE?

With x as (Select TRNADAT, Amount
             From MyTable
             Where ...
             Order By TRNDAT)
Select x.* MTD(Amount)

From x

;

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

Birgitta Hauser

"Shoot for the moon, even if you miss, you'll land among the stars."
(Les
Brown)
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." (Derek Bok)
"What is worse than training your staff and losing them? Not training
them
and keeping them!"

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Dennis Lovelady
Gesendet: Tuesday, 15. June 2010 15:30
An: 'Midrange Systems Technical Discussion'
Betreff: SQL row processing order for UDF

I created a UDF like a more complex version of this:

   CREATE FUNCTION MTD(date, decimal(11,2)

   RETURNS DECIMAL(13,2)

   RETURNS NULL ON NULL INPUT

   .

The select would like like:

   SELECT TRNDATE, AMOUNT, MTD(AMOUNT)

   ORDER BY TRNDATE



And ideally the result would be a running total of month-to-date values.
Pretty slick.



What I found, though, leads me to believe that the MTD function is
being
called before the ORDER BY, and that's giving me wildly incorrect
results,
even when the source table is already in that sequence.  When the
source
table is already in the correct sequence and I drop the ORDER BY, I
*seem*to* get the results that I want, but I doubt there's any
guarantee of
that; besides, that's a requirement that'll be hard to meet.  So my
two-part
question is:  Is this expected behavior?   Is there a way around this?



Dennis E. Lovelady
AIM/Skype: delovelady      MSN: fastcounter@xxxxxxxxxxxx
 <http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady>
www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady --
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the
subject."
       - Winston Churchill



--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.


--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing
list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.