|
|
Posted by Erland Sommarskog on 11/04/05 01:06
(JayCallas@hotmail.com) writes:
> I have a requirement where I need to perform a query for position
> information. But for some types of entries, I need to "expand" the row
> to include additional position rows. Let me explain with an example:
>
> An index is a security that is made up of components where each
> component has a "weight" or a number of shares. So if I have 1 share of
> the index, I have X shares of each component.
Now, this sounds funny to me, because in our system you can also define
indexes. However, indexes are virtual - you can never have a position
in an index directly. (But you can have a position in a derivative that
has the index as its contract base.)
> Is a UNION the best way to perform the query. What are the pros and
> cons? What, if any, is a better way?
There might be other alternatives, but I think the UNION query is fine.
Since I was given this query in my lap, I ran out of fantasy of trying
something else.
--
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, esquel@sommarskog.se
Books Online for SQL Server SP3 at
http://www.microsoft.com/sql/techinfo/productdoc/2000/books.asp
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|