Date:         Tue, 27 Aug 2002 10:58:09 -0500
Reply-To:     Kevin Myers <KevinMyers@AUSTIN.RR.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Kevin Myers <KevinMyers@AUSTIN.RR.COM>
Subject:      Re: Proc SQL monotone
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

I agree with Sig's point that the need for monotonic() often reflects an
inherent problem in the underlying database design.  However one major issue
that discourages better database design in SAS along these lines is the lack
of built-in support for things like row ID values and/or (preferably)
surrogate keys.  I know that SI gave some consideration to incorporating
surrogate key support for V9 (among other things), but that was shelved in
favor of other manpower intensive projects which were deemed to be higher
priority (e.g. multi-tasking/multi-threading).  I hope that SI will tackle
the surrogate key issue in the near future, because the lack of surrogate
key support is a major impediment in many database design scenarios.

s/KAM


----- Original Message -----
From: "Sigurd Hermansen" <HERMANS1@WESTAT.COM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.sas-l
To: <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: Proc SQL monotone


> I've posted a number of examples of how you can use MONOTONIC()
selectively
> to convert implicit sequences in SAS datasets to explicit sequence
numbers.
> Although MONOTONIC() has multiple arguments, the SI birdie who sent
> documentation to me advised against using the function less selectively.
>
> In a sense the function supplies a workaround for bad database design.
> Speaking for myself, I'd prefer to see it used to facilitate a transition
> from bad to good database design, and not as a standard function in SQL.
>
> Sig
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: david.mcnulty@QUESTINTL.COM [mailto:david.mcnulty@QUESTINTL.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 6:48 AM
> To: SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Proc SQL monotone
>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> Some time ago someone on the list mentioned an undocumented function
within
> PROC SQL. I think the function was called monotone and seemed to have a
> similar functionality to the automatic data step variable _n_. Can someone
> point me in the right direction.
>
> Thanks
>
> Dave.
> IMPORTANT NOTICE:
> This email is confidential, may be legally privileged, and is for the
> intended recipient only.  Access, disclosure, copying, distribution, or
> reliance on any of it by anyone else is prohibited and may be a criminal
> offence.  Please delete if obtained in error and email confirmation to the
> sender.