Is this guaranteed: SELECT TOP 1 FROM ... ORDER BY Field1, Field2, Field3

SELECT TOP 1 FROM ... ORDER BY Field1, Field2, Field3
Will the statement below, always return the first record of the same
stand-alone SELECT statement as below:
SELECT * FROM ... ORDER BY Field1, Field2, Field3
Thanks,
JayYes, assuming you use the ORDER BY clause and the data remains constant.
Insert a new row, and it may be the new top result.
"Jay" <jay6447@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131529297.922481.160800@.g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> SELECT TOP 1 FROM ... ORDER BY Field1, Field2, Field3
> Will the statement below, always return the first record of the same
> stand-alone SELECT statement as below:
> SELECT * FROM ... ORDER BY Field1, Field2, Field3
>
> Thanks,
> Jay
>|||Didn't you see the contrary example that Razvan posted?
http://groups.google.com/group/micr...3752b9548322706
David Portas
SQL Server MVP
--|||In SQL Server 2005, we are a bit more consistent with TOP + ORDER BY
semantics than perhaps some previous releases.
Here are the basic rules:
1. ORDER BY determines the presentation order for the _output_ of a query.
2. Within the same select block, an ORDER BY implies that TOP returns the
TOP N rows (not necessarily in a specific order).
3. ORDER BY in subselects or views does *not* guarantee the output of a
containing query.
So, for TOP N... ORDER BY ... with no containing select block, both the set
and the order are guaranted.
Within a subquery, TOP N ... ORDER BY guarantees the set but not the output
order (you need a top-level ORDER BY to guarantee output order).
Conor Cunningham
SQL Server Query Optimization Team
"Jay" <jay6447@.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131529297.922481.160800@.g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> SELECT TOP 1 FROM ... ORDER BY Field1, Field2, Field3
> Will the statement below, always return the first record of the same
> stand-alone SELECT statement as below:
> SELECT * FROM ... ORDER BY Field1, Field2, Field3
>
> Thanks,
> Jay
>