Very Computer

Field1               Field2
George               George
GeorgeJohn           John
GeorgeJohnPeter      Peter
GeorgeJohnPeterMark  Mark
.....                .......

Field2 is displaying a set of first names. Field1 displays
the sum of all the first names displayed up to that time
in Field2

Is there anyway to do this through a view?.I know this can
be done with a VB recordset or SQL cursor, but I am
wondering if this is possible with a SQL view

Thanks

Quote:>> Field2 is displaying a set of first names. Field1 displays the sum

No! Where to begin?? You missed *everything* in your basic relational
database course in school.  

Rows are not records, columns are not fields and tables are not files.
Table have no ordering because they are based on sets.  Columns holds
scalar values (remember 1NF?).  

If you want to do 1950's record-at-a-time file processing, then write a
cursor and lose all the advantages of the relational model for last 30
years.  

--CELKO--
 ===========================
 Please post DDL, so that people do not have to guess what the keys,
constraints, Declarative Referential Integrity, datatypes, etc. in your
schema are.

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

Quote:> >> Field2 is displaying a set of first names. Field1 displays the sum
> [SIC] of all the first names displayed up to that time in Field2.  Is
> there anyway to do this through a view?.  I know this can be done with a
> VB recordset or SQL cursor, but I am wondering if this is possible with
> a SQL view  <<

> No! Where to begin?? You missed *everything* in your basic relational
> database course in school.

> Rows are not records, columns are not fields and tables are not files.
> Table have no ordering because they are based on sets.  Columns holds
> scalar values (remember 1NF?).

> If you want to do 1950's record-at-a-time file processing, then write a
> cursor and lose all the advantages of the relational model for last 30
> years.

Oracle can do this in a view quite easilly,
just happens that SQLServer cannot.

And Joe, a Set is ordered just as soon as you impose
an ordering on it.  A relation is a subset of the cross
product of some sets (called domains).  A domain may
have an ordering, and any ordering on a domain is extendable
to an ordering on the any relation involving that domain.

Moreover when we store data in relational databases we
expect to be able to answer questions about that data.

For instance it's quite easilly generate a year-to-date total
in SQL, it's just hard to put the year-to-date column on a
result grouped by month.  This really just a shortcoming
of ANSI SQL, and doesn't have any bearing on relational theory.

David

No thanks this time, Mr Expert

Quote:>-----Original Message-----
>>> Field2 is displaying a set of first names. Field1
displays the sum
>[SIC] of all the first names displayed up to that time in
Field2.  Is
>there anyway to do this through a view?.  I know this can
be done with a
>VB recordset or SQL cursor, but I am wondering if this is
possible with
>a SQL view  <<

>No! Where to begin?? You missed *everything* in your
basic relational
>database course in school.  

>Rows are not records, columns are not fields and tables
are not files.
>Table have no ordering because they are based on sets.  
Columns holds
>scalar values (remember 1NF?).  

>If you want to do 1950's record-at-a-time file

Quote:>cursor and lose all the advantages of the relational
model for last 30
>years.  

>--CELKO--
> ===========================
> Please post DDL, so that people do not have to guess
what the keys,
>constraints, Declarative Referential Integrity,

Quote:>schema are.

>*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com
***
>Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!
>.

  from Table

At least this eliminates a cursor.

Quote:>-----Original Message-----
>Is there anyway I can create dynamically (with a view)a
>field, whose value is a string containing the sum of all
>of the values displayed up to that time in a certain
>field?. I mean:

>Field1               Field2
>George               George
>GeorgeJohn           John
>GeorgeJohnPeter      Peter
>GeorgeJohnPeterMark  Mark
>......                .......

>Field2 is displaying a set of first names. Field1
displays
>the sum of all the first names displayed up to that time
>in Field2

>Is there anyway to do this through a view?.I know this
can
>be done with a VB recordset or SQL cursor, but I am
>wondering if this is possible with a SQL view

>Thanks

>.

Michael MacGregor
Database Architect
SalesDriver

Michael MacGregor
Database Architect
SalesDriver

Quote:>-----Original Message-----
>I think though the first thing I'd ask is why? What on

Quote:>to accomplish with this?

>Michael MacGregor
>Database Architect
>SalesDriver

>.

A while ago I read "Database design for mere mortals" by Micheal J.
Hernandez, which I think is as good an introduction to relational database
ideas as you can get before going on to learn all the formal theory, and he
uses the records and fields terminology as well. Just because someone says
"records" and "fields" instead of "rows" and "columns" doesn't mean that
s/hemissed all the concepts.

Jacco

Quote:> >> Field2 is displaying a set of first names. Field1 displays the sum
> [SIC] of all the first names displayed up to that time in Field2.  Is
> there anyway to do this through a view?.  I know this can be done with a
> VB recordset or SQL cursor, but I am wondering if this is possible with
> a SQL view  <<

> No! Where to begin?? You missed *everything* in your basic relational
> database course in school.

> Rows are not records, columns are not fields and tables are not files.
> Table have no ordering because they are based on sets.  Columns holds
> scalar values (remember 1NF?).

> If you want to do 1950's record-at-a-time file processing, then write a
> cursor and lose all the advantages of the relational model for last 30
> years.

> --CELKO--
>  ===========================
>  Please post DDL, so that people do not have to guess what the keys,
> constraints, Declarative Referential Integrity, datatypes, etc. in your
> schema are.

> *** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
> Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

Quote:> Don't know don't care. While I do advocate good design and
> don't like this particular design...he asked a question
> and I replied. This is not the forum for us to get on soap
> boxes.

Michael MacGregor
Database Architect
SalesDriver

I completely agree with you on the context of finding out
as much details as they are willing to give you. The
assistance found here is great but the context of Joe's
message was a bit harsh, regardless of his tenure. I, too,
am an experienced DBA and while I don't think I have all
of the right answers I don't treat people as if they are
doing stupid things. We all have gone through the bad
design periods and have our own growing pains to talk
about and neither of us would have appreciated ridicule at
that time.

Quote:>-----Original Message-----
>> Don't know don't care. While I do advocate good design
and
>> don't like this particular design...he asked a question
>> and I replied. This is not the forum for us to get on
soap
>> boxes.
>You might not, others don't necessarily agree with you.
And this is not
>about getting on a soap box. When trying to help newbies
and those less
>experienced, it's often better to figure out what they
are trying to do
>rather than simply giving a pat answer to their question.
Do you advocate
>the use of cursors where a set oriented solution would be
better but you
>provide the cursor solution simply because that is what
they asked for? Bit
>blinkered isn't it?

>Michael MacGregor
>Database Architect
>SalesDriver

>.

Quote:> First, did i supply a cursor oriented answer?

Quote:> I completely agree with you on the context of finding out
> as much details as they are willing to give you. The
> assistance found here is great but the context of Joe's
> message was a bit harsh, regardless of his tenure. I, too,
> am an experienced DBA and while I don't think I have all
> of the right answers I don't treat people as if they are
> doing stupid things. We all have gone through the bad
> design periods and have our own growing pains to talk
> about and neither of us would have appreciated ridicule at
> that time.

MTM