Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with union
Search options not deleted
user 80131
Combines two or more query results. UNION removes duplicates; UNION ALL retains all rows.
1
vote
1
answer
3k
views
Better ways than rownum limits on a union all for fallback-style queries?
I am considering a construct like this:
select * from (
<query 1>
union all
<query 2>
union all
<query 3>
) where rownum = 1
The explain plan cost for this seems to be the sum of the three queries …
- 113