I agree that as a starting point for experimenting with an ad-hoc query, a "1 = 1" clause can make sense. There were two reasons I was mad: 1. Using "1 <> 1"

I agree that as a starting point for experimenting with an ad-hoc query, a "1 = 1" clause can make sense. There were two reasons I was mad: 1. Using "1 <> 1" to disable a branch of a WHERE clause is not something I would have done. I would have commented it out. If you are used to this idiom, it might feel like the natural thing to do, but I think commenting it out makes the intention clearer. 2. I understand that queries can get a little convoluted when you start experimenting with them until you get the results you need. It is perfectly natural, and it is how the views I have written started out, as well. But before I put my views into production, I cleaned up the code, removed the parts I did not need or added a little comment to explain why the code was there. Actually there were three: 3. The entire view was written in such a convoluted way that I was pretty sure the person who had written it was drunk at the time (he was an alcoholic, so this is probably true in the literal sense). When I inherited it, the view had about 700 lines and was mostly unreadable. When I was finished cleaning it up, I had reduced that to about 300 lines. I checked very carefully, but it still gave the exact same results. It still was not pretty, but if I could throw out more than 50% of the original code without affecting the result, you can probably imagine what a mess it was.