|
|
Posted by Doug on 03/09/06 00:12
RickW,
Another solution is to go back to SQL Server 2000.
In Access, can you ask "Access" to return your result sets in order?
Perhaps that MIGHT force the SQL getting the data from the view to
encourage a sort order. Can you put that code into the link getting the
data?
This is an interesting little hole.
I will submit that we have indeed found a "bug." If order by is not
"legal" for a view, then why does it compile, and not raise an error
when you save it off?
SQL Server is a product. It is being sold to CUSTOMERS. Customers do
not care whether something is intrinsicly internally blah blah blah.
Customers care that the product solves a need. Is it better to be
"right" and broke, or is it better to have happy customers?
I would further suggest this demonstrates views on the whole are not
used in a production environment.
I hate views. They are inefficient, they are slow, and they do not
allow flexibility.
What is a table? I think of it as a set of data. What is a view? A
view is a derived extremely slow set of data.
What does a stored procedure return? Why, it returns very quickly the
specific set of data that I am interested in
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|