[thelist] ASP equivalent to CFML question

[Jon Hall]

In CF this is done with a query of a query. Basically the data shaping is
done at each branch with standard SQL syntax, except the query is done of
the recordset already in memory. Pretty powerful stuff, but I still prefer
to get all my data with one cfquery even if it is extremly complex, or
bypass cfquery altogether and handle the complex stuff in TSQL.

The real power of ADO over cfquery is the whole connected recordset paradigm
imho. CF people think I'm crazy when I start on an ADO love fest...they just
don't know what they are missing. That said...we CFers now have JDBC at our
fingertips now, so I can't complain much anymore :)

jon
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jonathan_A_McPherson at rl.gov>
To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:12 AM
Subject: RE: [thelist] ASP equivalent to CFML question


> Nagrom,
>
> It's more powerful because it allows you to build an *arbitrary* level of
> hierarchical recordsets using *arbitrarily* complex sub-queries. Neither
are
> possible in CF, AFAIK.
>
> In CF, you are somewhat limited with how many levels down you can go (I'm
> not sure what the limit is -- any CF experts know?), and your query is
> limited to what you can express with a single SELECT. Essentially, CF is
> working behind the scenes to make a simple SELECT look like a hierarchical
> recordset. In ASP, you're getting a "true" hierarchy with the ability to
> branch off in sub-queries in ways that are difficult or impossible to
> express with straight JOINS or GROUPS.
>
> Jonathan.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagrom [mailto:morgan at morgankelsey.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:23 AM
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] ASP equivalent to CFML question
>
>
> jonathan,
>
> > The key feature of the <cfoutput group="column"> is that it allows you
to
> > create a kind of hierarchical recordset. You can do something similar to
> > this using data shaping in ASP. Your query will look different and it's
a
> > bit more work than in CF, but it's actually more powerful (IMO). Check
out
> > the 4guys article:
> >
> > http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/092599-1.shtml
> >
> > Jonathan.
> >
>
> its acheiving the same thing as CFs grouped attribute....
> i don't see more power here, only more code and complicated queries.
>
> what's more powerful about it?
>
> nagrom
>
> --
> For unsubscribe and other options, including
> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !