RE: Using SQL to check for duplicate records

Rob:

With lookahead, you'd print record #1 before reading record #2, somewhat like 
the SQL solution. This, of course, is in terms of "reading with the cycle". 
Record #1 would also set the flag that stays on or off during the entire group. 
It'll still be on when the third record of a group is read. 

The analogy to SQL might be that count(*)>1 or count(*)=1 for every record in 
the group. The count is already set before rows are read for printing.

Both solutions print records essentially as they're read rather than explicitly 
waiting for the next "cycle".

(Maybe an SQL guru can put something other than my conjecture into this.)

Tom Liotta

midrange-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>   1. RE: Using SQL to check for duplicate records (rob@xxxxxxxxx)
>
>With lookahead you don't care about the first by the time you get to the 
>third, you printed the first as soon as there was a second.  My question 
>would be what would trigger you to print the third and final row? Probably 
>doable, but I don't think I've done lookahead since college.

-- 
Tom Liotta
The PowerTech Group, Inc.
19426 68th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Phone  253-872-7788 x313
Fax    253-872-7904
http://www.powertech.com


__________________________________________________________________
New! Unlimited Netscape Internet Service.
Only $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
Act now to get a personalized email address!

Netscape. Just the Net You Need.