Version 3

Version 3

Errors in this submission. I've corrected in the next submission - it's the same code but due to the "p" tags that I've used when splitting the parts, the comments section wouldn't let me post corrected code.

Version 2 - My previous one was submitted before I had proof read the code so I made some minor mistakes that I've corrected here. The first issue was that I hadn't noticed the requirement for a "RowNo" column. I was already grouping by the value that need

Version 2 - My previous one was submitted before I had proof read the code so I made some minor mistakes that I've corrected here. The first issue was that I hadn't noticed the requirement for a "RowNo" column. I was already grouping by the value that need

I know, I realised after I had posted that the challenge was for any size. My submission will only work for up to two, e.g. "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ" would work but "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZA" would

Initial idea for solution Table 'TC70'. Scan count 1, logical reads 1027, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. Table 'Worktable'. Scan count 0, logical reads 0, physical reads 0, read-

Initial idea for solution Table 'TC70'. Scan count 1, logical reads 1027, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. Table 'Worktable'. Scan count 0, logical reads 0, physical reads 0, read-

Yep :-) Not sure whether or not the Constant Scan used for this is any better than using the tally table version that I produced though. On small tables, this is faster but on large tables the tally table seems to be faster.