I meant to blog about SQL PASS 2008, which I attended in Seattle and where I learned some good stuff, but I haven't had time. Plus there were so many blogs and tweets from it that most of what I would have said was covered. I will note that my favorite sessions were Itzik Ben-Gan's pre-conference session on Advanced T-SQL Querying and Bob Ward's talk about SQL Server memory. If you get a chance to hear either of these guys talk, jump on it - they're both extremely sharp, and good presenters to boot.
I'm posting this quick note because I had a question from one of our developers today regarding style for various joins. He wanted to know whether a condition on a secondary table in a query should go in the ON clause or the WHERE clause. This was my response:
I prefer to see conditions on the primary table in the WHERE clause, with conditions on the secondary tables in the ON clauses. This is because a condition in the WHERE clause for the secondary table when using an OUTER JOIN will effectively convert that to an INNER JOIN, making it confusing to read the query. However, putting that condition in the ON clause keeps the OUTER JOIN functioning as expected. Does that make sense?
Here’s an example with actual tables.
Notice how the first and second queries return the same thing even though the second is a left outer join, because putting the t2 condition in the WHERE clause makes it required for the whole result set instead of just the join. In the third query, the t2 condition is in the ON clause, making it only required for that join.
create table t1
(alfa int,
bravo int)
create table t2
(alfa int,
charlie int)
insert into t1
select 1, 2
union all select 2, 3
union all select 3, 4
union all select 4, 5
insert into t2
select 1, 4
union all select 2, 9
union all select 3, 16
select * from t1
inner join t2
on t1.alfa = t2.alfa
and t2.charlie = 16
where t1.alfa < 5
select * from t1
left outer join t2
on t1.alfa = t2.alfa
where t1.alfa < 5
and t2.charlie = 16
select * from t1
left outer join t2
on t1.alfa = t2.alfa
and t2.charlie = 16
where t1.alfa < 5
drop table t1, t2
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
True enough, but a nicely used set of parenthesis will also take care of the problem--and keep your coders consistent in queries that may involve further nesting than just 2 levels.
Post a Comment