[Sidebar: Politics. The question came from a DBA in a C# shop. That's why it's just hypothetical. Politically, they could never make use of this information. In C# world, Functional Programming is often scary and evil. It does exist -- obviously -- but it's called "Oracle Analytics", which makes it acceptable. If functional programming was called "functional programming" it would be unacceptable.]
[Sidebar: SQL. A big apples-to-oranges issue here is that the Oracle analytic functions can be composed in subqueries to write complex reporting queries. When you implement these functions in Python, you appear to lose some SQL "features" for report-writing. Actually, you move the SQL functional programming into Python functional programming. Everyone complains when they have to give up SQL. The true haterz say that using Python's functional programming for database processing subverts the database and leads to moral decay and the end of Western Civilization. Godwin's Law then applies.]
Specific functions lifted up to me were RANK, FIRST, LAST, ROW_NUMBER and DENSE_RANK. All of these are relatively simple functional programming examples.
First -- and foremost -- SQL GROUP-BY can be slow. No one ever wants to hear this. The true haterz will claim that it's supposed to be faster and provide a bunch of non-reasons. Please benchmark.
Every database has to provide a GROUP-BY implementation that's perfectly general; it has to sort. A procedural program can sometimes do the same operation much more quickly because it doens't have to be perfectly general; we can make different memory use tradeoffs than the the database does.
For a fast GROUP-BY, use a hash map of some kind. Read all the rows in the simplest, fastest array fetch possible. Here's how you can do a blindingly fast SUM/GROUP-BY.
from collections import defaultdict
from decimal import Decimal
groups = defaultdict( Decimal )
for row in some_query_result_set:
groups[row['key']] += groups[row['value']]
Writing code like this is based on the assumption that the number of groups is small enough to fit into memory. That assumption allows us to avoid a sort. The database can't make this assumption, and can't easily use this kind of data structure.
The analytical functions are nice applications of a functional style of programming. The ROW_NUMBER is already part of Python: it's the internal enumerate function.
We can use enumerate to implement FIRST.
def first( the_limit, some_query ):
for number, row in enumerate( some_query ):
if number >= the_limit:
This first function can be then used in another loop.
for row in first( 100, some_query ):
process( row )
LAST is more complex because there's no easy way to skip ahead. Instead we have to buffer some rows.
def last( the_limit, some_query ):
queue = 
for row in some_query:
if len(queue) == the_limit:
queue.pop( 0 )
queue.append( row )
for row in queue:
This can be sped up a little by using an explicit iterator object and breaking the `for row in some_query` loop into two phases to hoist the nearly-constant if-statement.
These can be composed with Python's sorted function.
for row in first( 10, sorted( some_query, key=lambda row: row['key'] ) ):
process( row )
This is elegant, but may only draw a tie in a race against the database. Python has the potential advantage of in-memory sorting. Oracle, however, is clever enough to use in-memory sorting on small sets of data, offsetting Python's advantage.
More Complex Functions
The more complex functions of RANK and DENSE_RANK require two-phase processing of rows. If we assume that we can fit the rows in memory, this isn't very complex at all. Indeed, the rank function is just a glorified order-by of a subset of the original data. However, it does require a potentially slow sort step.
ranked = enumerate ( sorted( some_query,
key = lambda row: row['key'] ) )
Okay. So RANK isn't so complex after all. Functional programming rocks.
DENSE_RANKED is confusing to me, but it look like the key phrase is "Rows with equal values for the ranking criteria receive the same rank." This means that the simple built-in enumerate isn't appropriate, and we need a key-aware enumeration.
def dense_rank( some_query, key ):
current = query_iter.next()
yield rank, current
for row in query_iter:
if key(current) != key(row):
rank += 1
yield rank, row
One of the strong suits of SQL is that it allows us to define a functional-programming composition. Rather than write a lot of looping, we specify a series of functions which are composed and applied to our data.
For example, using FIRST and DENSE_RANK can be done like this.
for row in first( 10, dense_rank( some_ordered_query, key=lambda row: row['key'] ) ):
process( row )
This functional programming composition is -- BTW -- precisely what SQL specifies. SQL describes incremental processing of each row through a kind of pipeline that does map, filter, reduce and sort algorithms on the row.
The ORDER-BY clause is an initial sort.
The WHERE clause is an initial filter. It may involve a mapping if there are calculations in the various parts of the WHERE clause.
The GROUP-BY clause is a reduction into groups.
The HAVING clause is a second filter, applied to the groups. It may involve a mapping if there are calculations in the various parts of the HAVING clause.
Finally the SELECT clause is a mapping that does calculations on the resulting collection of rows.
The analytic functions, like subqueries, are simple complex mapping operations that involve other query pipelines.