An explicit asc modifier makes the KQL sort by solution meet the ascending goal

Ingest and transform streaming data
Answer Correct answer: A - The solution explicitly sorts by No_Bikes asc, satisfying the ascending-order requirement, and sort by is valid KQL.

Note: This question is part of a series of questions that present the same scenario. Each question in the series contains a unique solution that might meet the stated goals. Some question sets might have more than one correct solution, while others might not have a correct solution. After you answer a question in this section, you will NOT be able to return to it. As a result, these questions will not appear in the review screen. You have a Fabric eventstream that loads data into a table named Bike_Location in a KQL database. The table contains the following columns: BikepointID - Street - Neighbourhood - No_Bikes - No_Empty_Docks - Timestamp - You need to apply transformation and filter logic to prepare the data for consumption. The solution must return data for a neighbourhood named Sands End when No_Bikes is at least 15. The results must be ordered by No_Bikes in ascending order. Solution: You use the following code segment: Does this meet the goal? - image

  1. Yes Correct Answer
  2. No
kql sort asc

Community Votes

A
100%

100% of anonymous learners picked answer A. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.

Community Insight

sort by is valid KQL and equivalent to order by; adding an explicit asc modifier satisfies an ascending-order requirement, unlike the default descending sort.

The proposed KQL code filters bike_location for Sands End with No_Bikes >= 15 and applies 'sort by No_Bikes asc'; the explicit asc modifier returns the rows in ascending order, so the solution meets the goal.

Claiming 'sort by' is illegal KQL and must be replaced with 'order by'; the documentation states the two operators are synonyms, so sort by with asc meets the goal.

Community Discussion (4 comments)

GHill1982 👍 8 Selected: A
The sort and order operators are equivalent. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/kusto/query/sort-operator?view=microsoft-fabric
benni_ale 👍 1 Selected: A
correct!
henryphchan 👍 1 Selected: A
sort by and order by are synonyms
Bharat 👍 1 Selected: B
Actually, the correct answer is No here because 'sort by' is illegal in KQL. It should be 'order by' instead.

Comments & Corrections

No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.

Log in to comment, report an error, or add a note about this question.

Submitted for moderation before publishing. Keep it helpful and respectful.

Expert Analysis

Why the Answer Is Correct

The requirement is Sands End rows with No_Bikes at least 15, ordered by No_Bikes ascending. The proposed code segment uses 'sort by No_Bikes asc': the KQL documentation states the sort operator supports the asc modifier and that order by is its synonym, so the syntax is valid and the explicit asc delivers the required ascending order. Hence the answer is Yes.

Why the Other Options Are Wrong

Option B (No) would apply if the solution relied on the default descending order or used invalid syntax; neither is the case here, since asc is explicit and sort by is documented KQL.

Community Comment Notes

The community strongly favors A (91). GHill1982 (8 likes) cites the sort operator documentation stating the sort and order operators are equivalent, and henryphchan notes they are synonyms. Bharat's dissent claims sort by is illegal, but the documentation shows both operators are supported.

Official Reference

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/kusto/query/sort-operator?view=microsoft-fabric

Related Analysis

You have a Fabric deployment pipeline that uses three worksp

A-Grade

You have a Fabric workspace named Workspace1. You plan to in

S-Grade

Note: This question is part of a series of questions that pr

S-Grade

← Back to DP-700 Study Guide