Filter and Sorting in RDL

In RDL, we can do filter and sorting in Query: "Select * from tables where field_a > 100 order by field_b", or in "Filters" and "Sorting":  
         <Filter>
               <FilterExpression> = Fields!Field_a.Value </FilterExpression>
               <Operator> GreaterThan </Operator>
               <FilterValues>
                    <FilterValue> = 100 </FilterValue>
               </FilterValues>
         </Filter>
          <Sorting>
                 <SortBy>
                      <SortExpression> = Fields!field_b.Value <SortExpression>
                 </SortBy>
          </Sorting>
   I wonder which way is more efficient in terms of application performance (such as response time...).

treehouse2008Asked:
Who is Participating?
 
dbaSQLCommented:
i have found it is easier, and sometimes faster, to let the report processor handle the sorting and filtering, rather than using the ORDER BY within your tsql.  
the same is mentioned within 'Hitchhiker's Guide to SQL Server 2000 Reporting Services', too.
0
 
treehouse2008Author Commented:
But the book says:
"if you're issuing a query against a relational data source that is fully optimized for searching and sorting data, you should do your sort ordering on the database server as part of the query. Runtime sorting within the table on Reporting Services is problematic and has in fact overridden our SQL sort order."
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.