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

DP-700 By islever Editorial Last updated Sep 26, 2026

Ingest and transform streaming data

Short answer

A The solution explicitly sorts by No_Bikes asc, satisfying the ascending-order requirement, and sort by is valid KQL.

Question

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? - Exhibit: An explicit asc modifier makes the KQL sort by solution meet the

Exhibit: An explicit asc modifier makes the KQL sort by solution meet the

Yes Correct Answer
No

Key Takeaways

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.

Common mistake: 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.

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

This link opens the official vendor documentation in a new tab.

Community Votes

100%

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

Discussion 4 contributions

Compiled from public community threads and reader submissions, lightly edited for clarity. Handles and vote tallies are shown as recorded, and comments reflect the views of individual contributors.

From public community threads 4

GHill1982 👍 8 Answered A

The sort and order operators are equivalent. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/kusto/query/sort-operator?view=microsoft-fabric
Bharat 👍 1 Answered B

Actually, the correct answer is No here because 'sort by' is illegal in KQL. It should be 'order by' instead.
henryphchan 👍 1 Answered A

sort by and order by are synonyms
benni_ale 👍 1 Answered A

correct!

Reader comments & corrections

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

← Back to DP-700 Study Guide