一个语句好像比较难!SELECT *, 5 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 0, 100;
SELECT *, 4 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 100, 100;
SELECT *, 3 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 200, 100;
SELECT *, 2 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 300, 100;
SELECT *, 1 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 400, 100;1、2、3、4、5即为n_arrange的值不过上述结果可能会出现不太正确的现象!比如,点击次数最高的记录有500条,那上述结果却把这些记录也分为不同的n_arrange,呵呵不过,按上述方法仅定位一条记录的n_arrange是准确的
SELECT count(*) FROM rbt WHERE Rbt_counter>该记录的Rbt_counter值
按count(*)的值确定该记录的n_arrange值再考虑考虑~~~~~~
SELECT *, 4 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 100, 100;
SELECT *, 3 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 200, 100;
SELECT *, 2 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 300, 100;
SELECT *, 1 FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC LIMIT 400, 100;1、2、3、4、5即为n_arrange的值不过上述结果可能会出现不太正确的现象!比如,点击次数最高的记录有500条,那上述结果却把这些记录也分为不同的n_arrange,呵呵不过,按上述方法仅定位一条记录的n_arrange是准确的
SELECT count(*) FROM rbt WHERE Rbt_counter>该记录的Rbt_counter值
按count(*)的值确定该记录的n_arrange值再考虑考虑~~~~~~
SELECT *, @INDEX := @INDEX + 1, CASE (@INDEX < 100)AND(@INDEX > 0) THEN .....
没办法测试给你了,
对不起,
目前是困难阶段http://expert.csdn.net/Expert/topic/2179/2179672.xml?temp=.5654718我出来时被老板扣工资了,
呜呜,
身边只有1200元,
请 MySQL 版的朋友多多包涵,
犬犬(心帆) 会努力找到工作,
继续上网为大伙服务的
select @Item:=@Item+1 as Item,
(5-truncate(@Item/100)) as n_arrange
FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC....
select @Item:=@Item+1 as Item,
(5-truncate(@Item/100)) as n_arrange
FROM rbt ORDER BY Rbt_counter DESC....