Pagination without Limits

kenhess

I have my pagination working with LIMIT 5, 10 for instance but the problem is that my result set is only sorted for the 10 rows that I grab at a time. I need the entire result set sorted then displayed 10 at a time.
As I say, it works now but the sorting is off for the limited sets and my users are a little bitchy about it.

Is there a way to show 10 results at a time from the entire set without limits?

Do I have to create a temporary table of sorted results to query from to do it?

drawmack

either that or store the result set in a text file on the server and use sessions to open the correct set, however I don't understand why the sorting is off as it should do the complete query on the db server and then only return the 10 rows you want.

kenhess

Hmm, I will look at the results myself...some of these users may need to just say no when people offer them drugs.

TheDefender

Take a look at this tut on pagination

It's a great tutorial that does what it sounds like you want it to do... (If I am reading your post correctly)

kenhess

I just read that one from another of your posts, it is good, and it is the way I am currently doing it.

I am going off of what a user said...that the sorting is good for the 10 results at a time, but not for the entire results set.

TheDefender

I kind of gathered that's what you meant, but that doesn't make any sense if you think about it...

Basically what you are saying is that it gets 10 results based on the offset, and then sorts those values only... (So in theory, it woul dbe possible to miss data because of this sorting technique).

I have modded this very script for a Corporate Directory and it works just fine. The output of the script gives me a sort of 10 results and doesn't miss a name. If you sort the array AFTER you run the query, then yes, that's exactly what will happen, but if you add an ORDER BY clause to your query, then it works just fine.

kenhess

Well, without paging, I have my arrays being uksorted but with paging, it seems that this sorting is bypassed for some reason.

The non-paged version is sorted fine, but the limit 10 ones are sorted, but just not all together,...I will have 7 results together then on another page...4 related results, properly sorted but just not with the others...it does seem as if they get sorted by each 10 that is grabbed from the db.

So would putting an ORDER BY Name ASC on the query solve this?

drawmack

yeah if you sort within the query then the results are sorted before they are trimmed by the limit clause

kenhess

Ok, I just did it and it does sort them asc but now I am back to my old problem of having:

abc1
abc10
abc11
abc2
abc20
abc21
abc3

and my uksorting in my arrays seems to be getting bypassed.

TheDefender

Where exactly is the problem with how this group is sorted? And why are you trying to uksort the array? I almost hate to say it, but maybe we all need to take a step back here, so we can all get on the same page?

Also, it would help if you post some code with the explanation, so we can better identify what you are trying to accomplish, and help steer you in that direction.