Related
I have two related tables (unnecessary columns not listed):
LOCATION
VENUE_ID - NUMBER(38,0)
VISIT
ID - NUMBER(38,0)
VENUE_ID - NUMBER(38,0)
DEVICE_ID - VARCHAR(16777216)
The tables are related such that visits are associated with a location via VENUE_ID.
I'm attempting to get the count of unique device ids by location, so I wrote the following query:
SELECT "d"."VENUE_ID"
, (
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM (
SELECT DISTINCT "f0"."DEVICE_ID"
FROM "MAIN"."VISIT" AS "f0"
WHERE "d"."VENUE_ID" = "f0"."VENUE_ID"
) AS "t")
FROM "MAIN"."LOCATION" AS "d"
Unfortunately, this query resulted in the cryptic error SQL compilation error: Unsupported subquery type cannot be evaluated.
Through a bit of experimentation, I've found that I can get the query to return without error, but only if I add an additional (useless) subquery prior to the existing one in the SELECT:
SELECT "d"."VENUE_ID"
-- New Useless Subquery
, (
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM "MAIN"."VISIT" AS "f"
WHERE "d"."VENUE_ID" = "f"."VENUE_ID")
--
, (
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM (
SELECT DISTINCT "f0"."DEVICE_ID"
FROM "MAIN"."VISIT" AS "f0"
WHERE "d"."VENUE_ID" = "f0"."VENUE_ID"
) AS "t")
FROM "MAIN"."LOCATION" AS "d"
If I move the new subquery to anywhere in the select after the distinct subquery, the error returns. I've reviewed the documentation on subqueries in Snowflake and either I am not understanding how that applies to my query here or I'm facing undocumented behavior. Anyone have any idea what's going on here?
I think you're making this more complex than this needs to be. Below should be all you need:
SELECT l.venue_id
, count(distinct v.device_id)
FROM location l
LEFT JOIN visit v
on l.venue_id = v.venue_id
GROUP BY l.venue_id
The answer is a little cryptic, but what happens is this:
You are asking for ONE value and you need to guarantee that only ONE value is returned by your subquery. A distinct clause cannot guarantee that. In some databases that will work as long as the data returns one row, but the moment you get two rows then the database will throw an error.
Snowflake is strict on its subquery analysis. So you need to use a subquery that is guarantee to return always one value, for example select sum(..), select count(..)
I run the following query:
SELECT
orderdetails.sku,
orderdetails.mf_item_number,
orderdetails.qty,
orderdetails.price,
supplier.supplierid,
supplier.suppliername,
supplier.dropshipfees,
cost = (SELECT supplier_item.price
FROM supplier_item,
orderdetails,
supplier
WHERE supplier_item.sku = orderdetails.sku
AND supplier_item.supplierid = supplier.supplierid)
FROM orderdetails,
supplier,
group_master
WHERE invoiceid = '339740'
AND orderdetails.mfr_id = supplier.supplierid
AND group_master.sku = orderdetails.sku
I get the following error:
Msg 512, Level 16, State 1, Line 2
Subquery returned more than 1 value. This is not permitted when the subquery follows =, !=, <, <= , >, >= or when the subquery is used as an expression.
Any ideas?
Try this:
SELECT
od.Sku,
od.mf_item_number,
od.Qty,
od.Price,
s.SupplierId,
s.SupplierName,
s.DropShipFees,
si.Price as cost
FROM
OrderDetails od
INNER JOIN Supplier s on s.SupplierId = od.Mfr_ID
INNER JOIN Group_Master gm on gm.Sku = od.Sku
INNER JOIN Supplier_Item si on si.SKU = od.Sku and si.SupplierId = s.SupplierID
WHERE
od.invoiceid = '339740'
This will return multiple rows that are identical except for the cost column. Look at the different cost values that are returned and figure out what is causing the different values. Then ask somebody which cost value they want, and add the criteria to the query that will select that cost.
Check to see if there are any triggers on the table you are trying to execute queries against. They can sometimes throw this error as they are trying to run the update/select/insert trigger that is on the table.
You can modify your query to disable then enable the trigger if the trigger DOES NOT need to be executed for whatever query you are trying to run.
ALTER TABLE your_table DISABLE TRIGGER [the_trigger_name]
UPDATE your_table
SET Gender = 'Female'
WHERE (Gender = 'Male')
ALTER TABLE your_table ENABLE TRIGGER [the_trigger_name]
SELECT COLUMN
FROM TABLE
WHERE columns_name
IN ( SELECT COLUMN FROM TABLE WHERE columns_name = 'value');
note: when we are using sub-query we must focus on these points:
if our sub query returns 1 value in this case we need to use (=,!=,<>,<,>....)
else (more than one value), in this case we need to use (in, any, all, some )
cost = Select Supplier_Item.Price from Supplier_Item,orderdetails,Supplier
where Supplier_Item.SKU=OrderDetails.Sku and
Supplier_Item.SupplierId=Supplier.SupplierID
This subquery returns multiple values, SQL is complaining because it can't assign multiple values to cost in a single record.
Some ideas:
Fix the data such that the existing subquery returns only 1 record
Fix the subquery such that it only returns one record
Add a top 1 and order by to the subquery (nasty solution that DBAs hate - but it "works")
Use a user defined function to concatenate the results of the subquery into a single string
The fix is to stop using correlated subqueries and use joins instead. Correlated subqueries are essentially cursors as they cause the query to run row-by-row and should be avoided.
You may need a derived table in the join in order to get the value you want in the field if you want only one record to match, if you need both values then the ordinary join will do that but you will get multiple records for the same id in the results set. If you only want one, you need to decide which one and do that in the code, you could use a top 1 with an order by, you could use max(), you could use min(), etc, depending on what your real requirement for the data is.
I had the same problem , I used in instead of = , from the Northwind database example :
Query is : Find the Companies that placed orders in 1997
Try this :
SELECT CompanyName
FROM Customers
WHERE CustomerID IN (
SELECT CustomerID
FROM Orders
WHERE YEAR(OrderDate) = '1997'
);
Instead of that :
SELECT CompanyName
FROM Customers
WHERE CustomerID =
(
SELECT CustomerID
FROM Orders
WHERE YEAR(OrderDate) = '1997'
);
Either your data is bad, or it's not structured the way you think it is. Possibly both.
To prove/disprove this hypothesis, run this query:
SELECT * from
(
SELECT count(*) as c, Supplier_Item.SKU
FROM Supplier_Item
INNER JOIN orderdetails
ON Supplier_Item.sku = orderdetails.sku
INNER JOIN Supplier
ON Supplier_item.supplierID = Supplier.SupplierID
GROUP BY Supplier_Item.SKU
) x
WHERE c > 1
ORDER BY c DESC
If this returns just a few rows, then your data is bad. If it returns lots of rows, then your data is not structured the way you think it is. (If it returns zero rows, I'm wrong.)
I'm guessing that you have orders containing the same SKU multiple times (two separate line items, both ordering the same SKU).
The select statement in the cost part of your select is returning more than one value. You need to add more where clauses, or use an aggregation.
The error implies that this subquery is returning more than 1 row:
(Select Supplier_Item.Price from Supplier_Item,orderdetails,Supplier where Supplier_Item.SKU=OrderDetails.Sku and Supplier_Item.SupplierId=Supplier.SupplierID )
You probably don't want to include the orderdetails and supplier tables in the subquery, because you want to reference the values selected from those tables in the outer query. So I think you want the subquery to be simply:
(Select Supplier_Item.Price from Supplier_Item where Supplier_Item.SKU=OrderDetails.Sku and Supplier_Item.SupplierId=Supplier.SupplierID )
I suggest you read up on correlated vs. non-correlated subqueries.
As others have suggested, the best way to do this is to use a join instead of variable assignment. Re-writing your query to use a join (and using the explicit join syntax instead of the implicit join, which was also suggested--and is the best practice), you would get something like this:
select
OrderDetails.Sku,
OrderDetails.mf_item_number,
OrderDetails.Qty,
OrderDetails.Price,
Supplier.SupplierId,
Supplier.SupplierName,
Supplier.DropShipFees,
Supplier_Item.Price as cost
from
OrderDetails
join Supplier on OrderDetails.Mfr_ID = Supplier.SupplierId
join Group_Master on Group_Master.Sku = OrderDetails.Sku
join Supplier_Item on
Supplier_Item.SKU=OrderDetails.Sku and Supplier_Item.SupplierId=Supplier.SupplierID
where
invoiceid='339740'
Even after 9 years of the original post, this helped me.
If you are receiving these types of errors without any clue, there should be a trigger, function related to the table, and obviously it should end up with an SP, or function with selecting/filtering data NOT USING Primary Unique column. If you are searching/filtering using the Primary Unique column there won't be any multiple results. Especially when you are assigning value for a declared variable. The SP never gives you en error but only an runtime error.
"System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException (0x80131904): Subquery returned more than 1 value. This is not permitted when the subquery follows =, !=, <, <= , >, >= or when the subquery is used as an expression.
The statement has been terminated."
In my case obviously there was no clue, but only this error message. There was a trigger connected to the table and the table updating by the trigger also had another trigger likewise it ended up with two triggers and in the end with an SP. The SP was having a select clause which was resulting in multiple rows.
SET #Variable1 =(
SELECT column_gonna_asign
FROM dbo.your_db
WHERE Non_primary_non_unique_key= #Variable2
If this returns multiple rows, you are in trouble.
I have this SQL query:
select top(1)
salary
from
(select top(2) salary
from employee
order by salary desc) as b
order by
salary asc
If I don't utilize as b it will give me an error:
Incorrect syntax near ...
Why is mandatory to use as in this query?
You don't need the as keyword. In fact, I advise using as for column aliases but not for table aliases. So, I would write this as:
select top(1) salary
from (select top(2) salary
from employee
order by salary desc
) b
order by salary asc;
You do need the table alias for the subquery, because SQL Server requires that all subqueries in the from clause be named.
This is TSql syntax. Subquery in FROM must have an alias even it's never used. Oracle for example considers this alias optional.
This is because you have a sub-query that, according to the Transact-SQL documentation on FROM, makes the use of an alias mandatory:
When a derived table, rowset or table-valued function, or operator clause (such as PIVOT or UNPIVOT) is used, the required table_alias at the end of the clause is the associated table name for all columns, including grouping columns, returned.
Note that with derived table the kind of sub-query is intended that you use in your SQL statement:
derived_table
Is a subquery that retrieves rows from the database. derived_table is used as input to the outer query.
Because you are using 'salary' twice. Without an alias the interpreter won't know what 'salary' to order the results by. By using an alias it can discern between employee.salary and b.salary.
A different approach to get the 2nd highest salary... as if you need the 3rd or 4th you're approach would get much more challenging...
SELECT *
FROM (SELECT salary, row_number() over (order by salary desc) rn
FROM employee) E
WHERE rn = 2
You are creating two queries. The first one selects the top 2 salaries from employee. You are calling this list "b". Then you are selecting the top salary from "b".
I need to retrieve all rows from a table where 2 columns combined are all different. So I want all the sales that do not have any other sales that happened on the same day for the same price. The sales that are unique based on day and price will get updated to an active status.
So I'm thinking:
UPDATE sales
SET status = 'ACTIVE'
WHERE id IN (SELECT DISTINCT (saleprice, saledate), id, count(id)
FROM sales
HAVING count = 1)
But my brain hurts going any farther than that.
SELECT DISTINCT a,b,c FROM t
is roughly equivalent to:
SELECT a,b,c FROM t GROUP BY a,b,c
It's a good idea to get used to the GROUP BY syntax, as it's more powerful.
For your query, I'd do it like this:
UPDATE sales
SET status='ACTIVE'
WHERE id IN
(
SELECT id
FROM sales S
INNER JOIN
(
SELECT saleprice, saledate
FROM sales
GROUP BY saleprice, saledate
HAVING COUNT(*) = 1
) T
ON S.saleprice=T.saleprice AND s.saledate=T.saledate
)
If you put together the answers so far, clean up and improve, you would arrive at this superior query:
UPDATE sales
SET status = 'ACTIVE'
WHERE (saleprice, saledate) IN (
SELECT saleprice, saledate
FROM sales
GROUP BY saleprice, saledate
HAVING count(*) = 1
);
Which is much faster than either of them. Nukes the performance of the currently accepted answer by factor 10 - 15 (in my tests on PostgreSQL 8.4 and 9.1).
But this is still far from optimal. Use a NOT EXISTS (anti-)semi-join for even better performance. EXISTS is standard SQL, has been around forever (at least since PostgreSQL 7.2, long before this question was asked) and fits the presented requirements perfectly:
UPDATE sales s
SET status = 'ACTIVE'
WHERE NOT EXISTS (
SELECT FROM sales s1 -- SELECT list can be empty for EXISTS
WHERE s.saleprice = s1.saleprice
AND s.saledate = s1.saledate
AND s.id <> s1.id -- except for row itself
)
AND s.status IS DISTINCT FROM 'ACTIVE'; -- avoid empty updates. see below
db<>fiddle here
Old sqlfiddle
Unique key to identify row
If you don't have a primary or unique key for the table (id in the example), you can substitute with the system column ctid for the purpose of this query (but not for some other purposes):
AND s1.ctid <> s.ctid
Every table should have a primary key. Add one if you didn't have one, yet. I suggest a serial or an IDENTITY column in Postgres 10+.
Related:
In-order sequence generation
Auto increment table column
How is this faster?
The subquery in the EXISTS anti-semi-join can stop evaluating as soon as the first dupe is found (no point in looking further). For a base table with few duplicates this is only mildly more efficient. With lots of duplicates this becomes way more efficient.
Exclude empty updates
For rows that already have status = 'ACTIVE' this update would not change anything, but still insert a new row version at full cost (minor exceptions apply). Normally, you do not want this. Add another WHERE condition like demonstrated above to avoid this and make it even faster:
If status is defined NOT NULL, you can simplify to:
AND status <> 'ACTIVE';
The data type of the column must support the <> operator. Some types like json don't. See:
How to query a json column for empty objects?
Subtle difference in NULL handling
This query (unlike the currently accepted answer by Joel) does not treat NULL values as equal. The following two rows for (saleprice, saledate) would qualify as "distinct" (though looking identical to the human eye):
(123, NULL)
(123, NULL)
Also passes in a unique index and almost anywhere else, since NULL values do not compare equal according to the SQL standard. See:
Create unique constraint with null columns
OTOH, GROUP BY, DISTINCT or DISTINCT ON () treat NULL values as equal. Use an appropriate query style depending on what you want to achieve. You can still use this faster query with IS NOT DISTINCT FROM instead of = for any or all comparisons to make NULL compare equal. More:
How to delete duplicate rows without unique identifier
If all columns being compared are defined NOT NULL, there is no room for disagreement.
The problem with your query is that when using a GROUP BY clause (which you essentially do by using distinct) you can only use columns that you group by or aggregate functions. You cannot use the column id because there are potentially different values. In your case there is always only one value because of the HAVING clause, but most RDBMS are not smart enough to recognize that.
This should work however (and doesn't need a join):
UPDATE sales
SET status='ACTIVE'
WHERE id IN (
SELECT MIN(id) FROM sales
GROUP BY saleprice, saledate
HAVING COUNT(id) = 1
)
You could also use MAX or AVG instead of MIN, it is only important to use a function that returns the value of the column if there is only one matching row.
If your DBMS doesn't support distinct with multiple columns like this:
select distinct(col1, col2) from table
Multi select in general can be executed safely as follows:
select distinct * from (select col1, col2 from table ) as x
As this can work on most of the DBMS and this is expected to be faster than group by solution as you are avoiding the grouping functionality.
I want to select the distinct values from one column 'GrondOfLucht' but they should be sorted in the order as given in the column 'sortering'. I cannot get the distinct values of just one column using
Select distinct GrondOfLucht,sortering
from CorWijzeVanAanleg
order by sortering
It will also give the column 'sortering' and because 'GrondOfLucht' AND 'sortering' is not unique, the result will be ALL rows.
use the GROUP to select the records of 'GrondOfLucht' in the order given by 'sortering
SELECT GrondOfLucht
FROM dbo.CorWijzeVanAanleg
GROUP BY GrondOfLucht, sortering
ORDER BY MIN(sortering)
I am confused with the order of execution of this query, please explain me this.
I am confused with when the join is applied, function is called, a new column is added with the Case and when the serial number is added. Please explain the order of execution of all this.
select Row_number() OVER(ORDER BY (SELECT 1)) AS 'Serial Number',
EP.FirstName,Ep.LastName,[dbo].[GetBookingRoleName](ES.UserId,EP.BookingRole) as RoleName,
(select top 1 convert(varchar(10),eventDate,103)from [3rdi_EventDates] where EventId=13) as EventDate,
(CASE [dbo].[GetBookingRoleName](ES.UserId,EP.BookingRole)
WHEN '90 Day Client' THEN 'DC'
WHEN 'Association Client' THEN 'DC'
WHEN 'Autism Whisperer' THEN 'DC'
WHEN 'CampII' THEN 'AD'
WHEN 'Captain' THEN 'AD'
WHEN 'Chiropractic Assistant' THEN 'AD'
WHEN 'Coaches' THEN 'AD'
END) as Category from [3rdi_EventParticipants] as EP
inner join [3rdi_EventSignup] as ES on EP.SignUpId = ES.SignUpId
where EP.EventId = 13
and userid in (
select distinct userid from userroles
--where roleid not in(6,7,61,64) and roleid not in(1,2))
where roleid not in(19, 20, 21, 22) and roleid not in(1,2))
This is the function which is called from the above query.
CREATE function [dbo].[GetBookingRoleName]
(
#UserId as integer,
#BookingId as integer
)
RETURNS varchar(20)
as
begin
declare #RoleName varchar(20)
if #BookingId = -1
Select Top 1 #RoleName=R.RoleName From UserRoles UR inner join Roles R on UR.RoleId=R.RoleId Where UR.UserId=#UserId and R.RoleId not in(1,2)
else
Select #RoleName= RoleName From Roles where RoleId = #BookingId
return #RoleName
end
Queries are generally processed in the follow order (SQL Server). I have no idea if other RDBMS's do it this way.
FROM [MyTable]
ON [MyCondition]
JOIN [MyJoinedTable]
WHERE [...]
GROUP BY [...]
HAVING [...]
SELECT [...]
ORDER BY [...]
SQL is a declarative language. The result of a query must be what you would get if you evaluated as follows (from Microsoft):
Logical Processing Order of the SELECT statement
The following steps show the logical
processing order, or binding order,
for a SELECT statement. This order
determines when the objects defined in
one step are made available to the
clauses in subsequent steps. For
example, if the query processor can
bind to (access) the tables or views
defined in the FROM clause, these
objects and their columns are made
available to all subsequent steps.
Conversely, because the SELECT clause
is step 8, any column aliases or
derived columns defined in that clause
cannot be referenced by preceding
clauses. However, they can be
referenced by subsequent clauses such
as the ORDER BY clause. Note that the
actual physical execution of the
statement is determined by the query
processor and the order may vary from
this list.
FROM
ON
JOIN
WHERE
GROUP BY
WITH CUBE or WITH ROLLUP
HAVING
SELECT
DISTINCT
ORDER BY
TOP
The optimizer is free to choose any order it feels appropriate to produce the best execution time. Given any SQL query, is basically impossible to anybody to pretend it knows the execution order. If you add detailed information about the schema involved (exact tables and indexes definition) and the estimated cardinalities (size of data and selectivity of keys) then one can take a guess at the probable execution order.
Ultimately, the only correct 'order' is the one described ion the actual execution plan. See Displaying Execution Plans by Using SQL Server Profiler Event Classes and Displaying Graphical Execution Plans (SQL Server Management Studio).
A completely different thing though is how do queries, subqueries and expressions project themselves into 'validity'. For instance if you have an aliased expression in the SELECT projection list, can you use the alias in the WHERE clause? Like this:
SELECT a+b as c
FROM t
WHERE c=...;
Is the use of c alias valid in the where clause? The answer is NO. Queries form a syntax tree, and a lower branch of the tree cannot be reference something defined higher in the tree. This is not necessarily an order of 'execution', is more of a syntax parsing issue. It is equivalent to writing this code in C#:
void Select (int a, int b)
{
if (c = ...) then {...}
int c = a+b;
}
Just as in C# this code won't compile because the variable c is used before is defined, the SELECT above won't compile properly because the alias c is referenced lower in the tree than is actually defined.
Unfortunately, unlike the well known rules of C/C# language parsing, the SQL rules of how the query tree is built are somehow esoteric. There is a brief mention of them in Single SQL Statement Processing but a detailed discussion of how they are created, and what order is valid and what not, I don't know of any source. I'm not saying there aren't good sources, I'm sure some of the good SQL books out there cover this topic.
Note that the syntax tree order does not match the visual order of the SQL text. For example the ORDER BY clause is usually the last in the SQL text, but as a syntax tree it sits above everything else (it sorts the output of the SELECT, so it sits above the SELECTed columns so to speak) and as such is is valid to reference the c alias:
SELECT a+b as c
FROM t
ORDER BY c;
SQL query is not imperative but declarative, so you have no idea which the statement is executed first, but since SQL is evaluated by SQL query engines, most of the SQL engines follows similar process to obtain the results. You may have to understand how the query engine works internally to understand some SQL execution behavior.
Julia Evens has a great post explaining this, it is worth to check it out:
https://jvns.ca/blog/2019/10/03/sql-queries-don-t-start-with-select/
SQL is a declarative language, meaning that it tells the SQL engine what to do, not how. This is in contrast to an imperative language such as C, in which how to do something is clearly laid out.
This means that not all statements will execute as expected. Of particular note are boolean expressions, which may not evaluate from left-to-right as written. For example, the following code is not guaranteed to execute without a divide by zero error:
SELECT 'null' WHERE 1 = 1 OR 1 / 0 = 0
The reason for this is the query optimizer chooses the best (most efficient) way to execute a statement. This means that, for example, a value may be loaded and filtered before a transforming predicate is applied, causing an error. See the second link above for an example
See: here and here.
"Order of execution" is probably a bad mental model for SQL queries. Its hard to actually write a single query that would actually depend on order of execution (this is a good thing). Instead you should think of all join and where clauses happening simultaneously (almost like a template)
That said you could run display the Execution Plans which should give you insight into it.
However since its's not clear why you want to know the order of execution, I'm guessing your trying to get a mental model for this query so you can fix it in some way. This is how I would "translate" your query, although I've done well with this kind of analysis there's some grey area with how precise it is.
FROM AND WHERE CLAUSE
Give me all the Event Participants rows. from [3rdi_EventParticipants
Also give me all the Event Signup rows that match the Event Participants rows on SignUpID inner join 3rdi_EventSignup] as ES on EP.SignUpId = ES.SignUpId
But Only for Event 13 EP.EventId = 13
And only if the user id has a record in the user roles table where the role id is not in 1,2,19,20,21,22
userid in (
select distinct userid from userroles
--where roleid not in(6,7,61,64) and roleid not in(1,2))
where roleid not in(19, 20, 21, 22) and roleid not in(1,2))
SELECT CLAUSE
For each of the rows give me a unique ID
Row_number() OVER(ORDER BY (SELECT 1)) AS 'Serial Number',
The participants First Name EP.FirstName
The participants Last Name Ep.LastName
The Booking Role name GetBookingRoleName
Go look in the Event Dates and find out what the first eventDate where the EventId = 13 that you find
(select top 1 convert(varchar(10),eventDate,103)from [3rdi_EventDates] where EventId=13) as EventDate
Finally translate the GetBookingRoleName in Category. I don't have a table for this so I'll map it manually (CASE [dbo].[GetBookingRoleName](ES.UserId,EP.BookingRole)
WHEN '90 Day Client' THEN 'DC'
WHEN 'Association Client' THEN 'DC'
WHEN 'Autism Whisperer' THEN 'DC'
WHEN 'CampII' THEN 'AD'
WHEN 'Captain' THEN 'AD'
WHEN 'Chiropractic Assistant' THEN 'AD'
WHEN 'Coaches' THEN 'AD'
END) as Category
So a couple of notes here. You're not ordering by anything when you select TOP. You should probably have na order by there. You could also just as easily put that in your from clause e.g.
from [3rdi_EventParticipants] as EP
inner join [3rdi_EventSignup] as ES on EP.SignUpId = ES.SignUpId,
(select top 1 convert(varchar(10),eventDate,103)
from [3rdi_EventDates] where EventId=13
Order by eventDate) dates
There is a logical order to evaluation of the query text, but the database engine can choose what order execute the query components based upon what is most optimal. The logical text parsing ordering is listed below. That is, for example, why you can't use an alias from SELECT clause in a WHERE clause. As far as the query parsing process is concerned, the alias doesn't exist yet.
FROM
ON
OUTER
WHERE
GROUP BY
CUBE | ROLLUP
HAVING
SELECT
DISTINCT
ORDER BY
TOP
See the Microsoft documentation (see "Logical Processing Order of the SELECT statement") for more information on this.
Simplified order for T-SQL -> SELECT statement:
1) FROM
2) Cartesian product
3) ON
4) Outer rows
5) WHERE
6) GROUP BY
7) HAVING
8) SELECT
9) Evaluation phase in SELECT
10) DISTINCT
11) ORDER BY
12) TOP
as I had done so far - same order was applicable in SQLite.
Source => SELECT (Transact-SQL)
... of course there are (rare) exceptions.