Home » SQL & PL/SQL » SQL & PL/SQL » SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC (Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.1.0.2.0)
SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328408] Fri, 20 June 2008 01:41 Go to next message
subhadip.chanda
Messages: 64
Registered: May 2007
Member
hi,

My table structure is like this :-
create table test_tab1(A varchar2(20));

insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.3');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.10');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.11');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.12');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2E');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2E1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2E2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2.1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE11.2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2.11');

I want to sort the data.and my desire output should be like :-


AB1.1
AB1.2
AB1.3
AB1.10
AB1.11
ACE1.1
ACE1.2
ACE1.12
ACE1.2.1
ACE1.2.11
ACE11.2
ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E1
ACE1.2E2

I tried to sort using

SELECT * FROM test_tab1
ORDER BY SUBSTR(A,1,3),

But not getting desired output. please give any idea...




Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328419 is a reply to message #328408] Fri, 20 June 2008 02:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
If you can mix alphabetical string and number in any way with no rule, I don't think there is any SQL solution.
You have to add a PL/SQL function.

But if there are rules, a pattern then it is likely you can do it. Post them.

Regards
Michel
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328423 is a reply to message #328408] Fri, 20 June 2008 02:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
msmallya
Messages: 66
Registered: March 2008
Location: AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT
Member
Hi,

First of all your desired output is not properly sorted.

You can achieve this by creating function based index as
create index tt_idx on test_tab1
(translate(a,'0123456789','ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ')
||translate(a,'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ','0123456789'))


Output is
  1* select * from test_tab1
SQL> /

A
--------------------
AB1.1
AB1.2
AB1.3
AB1.10
AB1.11
ACE1.1
ACE1.12
ACE1.2
ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E1
ACE1.2E2
ACE1.2.1
ACE11.2
ACE1.2.11
--------------------

14 rows selected.


Regards,

MSMallya

[Updated on: Fri, 20 June 2008 02:31]

Report message to a moderator

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328427 is a reply to message #328423] Fri, 20 June 2008 02:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JRowbottom
Messages: 5933
Registered: June 2006
Location: Sunny North Yorkshire, ho...
Senior Member
@msmallya

You've not got an order by - therefore you don't have an ordered set of results. All your query seems to have done is brought the results back in the order of insert. If I reorder the rows like this, you'll see:
create table test_tab1(A varchar2(20));

insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2E');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2E1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.3');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.11');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.12');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('AB1.10');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2E2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2.1');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE11.2');
insert into test_tab1 VALUES('ACE1.2.11');

create index tt1_idx on test_tab1
(translate(a,'0123456789','ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ')
||translate(a,'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ','0123456789'));

SQL> select * from test_tab1;

A
--------------------
ACE1.2
ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E1
AB1.2
AB1.3
AB1.1
AB1.11
ACE1.1
ACE1.12
AB1.10
ACE1.2E2
ACE1.2.1
ACE11.2
ACE1.2.11

14 rows selected.


If you use your Translate as an ORDER BY, it still fails to give the correct order:
SQL> select * from test_tab1
  2  order by translate(a,'0123456789','ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ')
  3         ||translate(a,'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ','0123456789');

A
--------------------
AB1.1
AB1.10
AB1.11
AB1.2
AB1.3
ACE1.1
ACE1.12
ACE1.2.1
ACE1.2.11
ACE1.2
ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E1
ACE1.2E2
ACE11.2
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328442 is a reply to message #328427] Fri, 20 June 2008 03:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JRowbottom
Messages: 5933
Registered: June 2006
Location: Sunny North Yorkshire, ho...
Senior Member
@Op
You'll need to come up with a decent description of the order that you want the records to appear in.
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328448 is a reply to message #328427] Fri, 20 June 2008 04:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
msmallya
Messages: 66
Registered: March 2008
Location: AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT
Member
@JRowBottom

Yes, you are right, it simply reverted back records in an oreder
of insert.

I think Order by clause shall fullfill the requirement

select * from test_tab1
order by
(translate(a,'0123456789','ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ')
||translate(a,'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ','0123456789'))


A
--------------------
AB1.1
AB1.10
AB1.11
AB1.2
AB1.3
ACE1.1
ACE1.12
ACE1.2.1
ACE1.2.11
ACE1.2
ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E1
ACE1.2E2
ACE11.2

Thanx and Regards,

MSMallya

[Updated on: Fri, 20 June 2008 04:04]

Report message to a moderator

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328452 is a reply to message #328448] Fri, 20 June 2008 04:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JRowbottom
Messages: 5933
Registered: June 2006
Location: Sunny North Yorkshire, ho...
Senior Member
Sadly, the order that you return the rows in is somewhat different to the order that the OP wanted them in:
Your Order          Desired Order
AB1.1               AB1.1
AB1.10              AB1.2
AB1.11              AB1.3
AB1.2               AB1.10
AB1.3               AB1.11
ACE1.1              ACE1.1
ACE1.12             ACE1.2
ACE1.2.1            ACE1.12
ACE1.2.11           ACE1.2.1
ACE1.2              ACE1.2.1
ACE1.2E             ACE11.2
ACE1.2E1            ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E2            ACE1.2E1
ACE11.2             ACE1.2E2
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328453 is a reply to message #328448] Fri, 20 June 2008 04:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
Can you explain the rationale behind this?

Regards
Michel
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328465 is a reply to message #328408] Fri, 20 June 2008 04:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
@OP,

You have to better describe what you want.
It seems you want strings part in order of strings and number parts in order of number type.

But in this case, why "ACE11.2" is before "ACE1.2E" as 1 is less than 11?

Regards
Michel
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328501 is a reply to message #328465] Fri, 20 June 2008 06:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
If my assumptions are correct and your output example wrong, here's a query:
SQL> def max_fields=10
SQL> with 
  2    lines as ( 
  3      select level line, 
  4              case 
  5                when level <= &max_fields then '[^[:digit:]]+'
  6                else '[[:digit:]]+'
  7              end format,
  8              case 
  9                when level <= &max_fields then level 
 10                else level-&max_fields 
 11              end idx
 12      from dual 
 13      connect by level <= 2*&max_fields 
 14    ),
 15    data as (
 16      select a, line,
 17              case 
 18                when line <= &max_fields then regexp_substr(a,format,1,idx)
 19                else to_char(to_number(regexp_substr(a,format,1,idx)),'9999990')
 20              end part,
 21              row_number () over 
 22                (partition by a order by regexp_instr(a,format,1,idx)) rn
 23      from test_tab1, lines
 24      where regexp_substr(a,format,1,idx) is not null
 25    ),
 26    merging as (
 27      select a, sys_connect_by_path(part,'/') ord
 28      from data
 29      where connect_by_isleaf = 1
 30      connect by prior rn = rn - 1 and prior a = a
 31      start with rn = 1
 32    )
 33  select a from merging order by ord
 34  /
A
--------------------
AB1.1
AB1.2
AB1.3
AB1.10
AB1.11
ACE1.1
ACE1.2
ACE1.2.1
ACE1.2.11
ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E1
ACE1.2E2
ACE1.12
ACE11.2

14 rows selected.

Regards
Michel

[Updated on: Fri, 20 June 2008 06:08]

Report message to a moderator

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328504 is a reply to message #328501] Fri, 20 June 2008 06:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
JRowbottom
Messages: 5933
Registered: June 2006
Location: Sunny North Yorkshire, ho...
Senior Member
Quote:
If my assumptions are correct and your output example wrong, here's a query


No fair!!!
It's easy to get the right answer given those conditions Cool
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328505 is a reply to message #328504] Fri, 20 June 2008 06:12 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
JRowbottom wrote on Fri, 20 June 2008 13:11
Quote:
If my assumptions are correct and your output example wrong, here's a query


No fair!!!
It's easy to get the right answer given those conditions Cool

Laughing
Hmmm... I agree. Cool

Regards
Michel

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328613 is a reply to message #328501] Fri, 20 June 2008 15:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ebrian
Messages: 2794
Registered: April 2006
Senior Member
Definitely some uncertainty on the OP's ordering requirements, but based off of Michel's assumptions, another option could be:

SQL> select *
  2  from test_tab1
  3  order by regexp_substr(a1, '^\D+')
  4     , to_number(regexp_substr(a1, '\d+'))
  5     , to_number(regexp_substr(a1, '\d+',1, 2))  nulls first
  6     , regexp_substr(a1, '[[:alpha:]]+',1, 2)  nulls first
  7     , to_number(regexp_substr(a1, '\d+',1, 3)) nulls first;

A1
--------------------
AB1.1
AB1.2
AB1.3
AB1.10
AB1.11
ACE1.1
ACE1.2
ACE1.2.1
ACE1.2.11
ACE1.2E
ACE1.2E1
ACE1.2E2
ACE1.12
ACE11.2

14 rows selected.
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328618 is a reply to message #328613] Fri, 20 June 2008 16:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rdebruyn
Messages: 17
Registered: June 2008
Location: Ottawa
Junior Member
Either change the value to be like:
AB0001.0001
AB0001.0002
AB0001.0003
AB0001.0010
AB0001.0011
ACE0001.0001
ACE0001.0002
ACE0001.0002.0001
ACE0001.0002.0011
ACE0001.0002E
ACE0001.0002E0001
ACE0001.0002E0002
ACE0001.0012
ACE0011.0002

Or create a function that converts the data to be like this and a function based index. Order by that function call.

You would have to decide how the 0 padding required based on expected data.

I'm assuming the E is just a character and not an expression of the number of decimal places.
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328666 is a reply to message #328423] Sat, 21 June 2008 06:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
subhadip.chanda
Messages: 64
Registered: May 2007
Member
Shal I use this function based index on a view istead of table?
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328679 is a reply to message #328666] Sat, 21 June 2008 09:57 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
You can't index a view but you can index one of the base table.

In addition, the previous answer is meaningless in this "function based index", no index is relevant for ordering your data.

Regards
Michel
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328694 is a reply to message #328679] Sat, 21 June 2008 11:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rdebruyn
Messages: 17
Registered: June 2008
Location: Ottawa
Junior Member
Michel Cadot wrote on Sat, 21 June 2008 10:57
You can't index a view but you can index one of the base table.

In addition, the previous answer is meaningless in this "function based index", no index is relevant for ordering your data.




You may be right on the function based index. I hadn't tried it and someone else posted to do this in another thread. I knew if it didn't work as stated, it would lead to the solution.

Michel, I thought I was posting to a group of developers who could implement an idea. The idea is to put the data in a format that can be sorted as strings. So for you the idea doesn't work only because it needs a small implementation change from a function based index to a pseudo column?

subhadip.chanda, all that's needed is a column added to the base table and a trigger to populate that column by a call to the function on insert/update. Add that column to the view and use that it to sort.

Ray

[Updated on: Sat, 21 June 2008 11:06]

Report message to a moderator

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328697 is a reply to message #328694] Sat, 21 June 2008 12:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
Quote:
The idea is to put the data in a format that can be sorted as strings. So for you the idea doesn't work only because it needs a small implementation change from a function based index to a pseudo column?

I don't see the relation between changing the data format (which should be desirable but is actually almost never possible in real case for a developer as data format is enforced) and function based index.

Quote:
all that's needed is a column added to the base table and a trigger to populate that column by a call to the function on insert/update.

"all"? I don't think a developer can change anything in table structure and add his own trigger to feed his own function.

Quote:
Add that column to the view and use that it to sort.

Which view are you talking about?

Regards
Michel
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328702 is a reply to message #328694] Sat, 21 June 2008 23:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ebrian
Messages: 2794
Registered: April 2006
Senior Member
@Ray, you have suggested that the OP modify his data, create a new column, create a trigger, create a view, create a FBI, etc. It would seem that this is going around the barn to solve the OP's problem when two simple selects were provided that would preclude any modifications to data and/or database structure.

OF COURSE, the OP still hasn't provided ample details on his sorting requirements so maybe they'll entertain changing the data and/or database structure!!
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328974 is a reply to message #328697] Mon, 23 June 2008 10:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rdebruyn
Messages: 17
Registered: June 2008
Location: Ottawa
Junior Member
Michel,

The SQL you provided is <b>truly</b> the most efficient SQL I've ever seen! Please note the sarcasm.

You seem to be acting as though you gave the initial post and have all the facts. If, in your case, you have no ability to create a column in a atable and populate it with a trigger, so be it. Why not find out what capability the poster has?

There's rarely enough info given on posts to see the whole picture. If you have some problem understanding the requirement, you have two choices - ask more OR don't answer.

<b>subhadip.chanda</b> sorry about the bantering. You don't need to create a view if you don't have one. You can do something as simple as add to you query order by myFunction(...

Ray

[Updated on: Mon, 23 June 2008 10:38]

Report message to a moderator

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328978 is a reply to message #328974] Mon, 23 June 2008 11:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
Instead of blablabla, post the code you are thinking about. I still don't understand what you want to do.

You have OP table, you have OP data, now post what you think it must be done.

Regards
Michel
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328980 is a reply to message #328978] Mon, 23 June 2008 11:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rdebruyn
Messages: 17
Registered: June 2008
Location: Ottawa
Junior Member
Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 12:03
Instead of blablabla, post the code you are thinking about. I still don't understand what you want to do.

You have OP table, you have OP data, now post what you think it must be done.

Regards
Michel



Oooh! I think someone needs a time out!
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #328984 is a reply to message #328980] Mon, 23 June 2008 11:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
rdebruyn wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 18:14
Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 12:03
Instead of blablabla, post the code you are thinking about. I still don't understand what you want to do.

You have OP table, you have OP data, now post what you think it must be done.

Regards
Michel



Oooh! I think someone needs a time out!

Well, you still don't answer the questions nor post anything practical (or even useful).

Regards
Michel

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #329011 is a reply to message #328984] Mon, 23 June 2008 13:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
rdebruyn
Messages: 17
Registered: June 2008
Location: Ottawa
Junior Member
Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 12:40
Instead of blablabla, post the code you are thinking about. I still don't understand what you want to do.

You have OP table, you have OP data, now post what you think it must be done.

Regards
Michel



ok... you seem to act as though I posted here or that I'm supposed to provide a full code solution. Next time I'll send you a bill.


CREATE OR REPLACE
PACKAGE p_test_tab1
IS

FUNCTION format_for_sort(p_a IN test_tab1.a%TYPE)
RETURN VARCHAR2;

END p_test_tab1;
/

CREATE OR REPLACE
PACKAGE BODY p_test_tab1
IS

FUNCTION format_for_sort(p_a IN test_tab1.a%TYPE)
RETURN VARCHAR2
IS

TYPE sections_tab_type IS TABLE OF VARCHAR2(100) INDEX BY BINARY_INTEGER;
sections_tab sections_tab_type;

v_return_value VARCHAR2(1000) := '';
v_trimmed_value test_tab1.a%TYPE := p_a;
dotIndex NUMBER;
loop_counter NUMBER := 0;

FUNCTION format_section(p_section IN VARCHAR2)
RETURN VARCHAR2
IS

v_test_number NUMBER;

BEGIN

BEGIN

v_test_number := NVL(p_section, '0');
RETURN LPAD(v_test_number, 5, '0');

EXCEPTION WHEN OTHERS THEN NULL;
END;

RETURN p_section;

END format_section;

PROCEDURE trim_section
IS

v_section VARCHAR2(100);

BEGIN

IF dotIndex = 0 THEN

v_section := v_trimmed_value;

ELSE

v_section := SUBSTR(v_trimmed_value, 1, (dotIndex - 1));

END IF;

--v_trimmed_value := SUBSTR(v_trimmed_value, (dotIndex + 2));
v_trimmed_value := SUBSTR(v_trimmed_value, (LENGTH(v_section) + 2));

sections_tab(sections_tab.COUNT + 1) := format_section(v_section);

END trim_section;

PROCEDURE separate_sections
IS
BEGIN

LOOP

dotIndex := INSTR(v_trimmed_value, '.', 1);

trim_section;

EXIT WHEN dotIndex = 0;

loop_counter := loop_counter + 1;
EXIT WHEN loop_counter > 5;

END LOOP;

END separate_sections;

PROCEDURE build_return
IS
BEGIN

FOR sectionIndex IN 1..sections_tab.COUNT LOOP

IF sectionIndex > 1 THEN

v_return_value := v_return_value || '.';

END IF;

v_return_value := v_return_value || sections_tab(sectionIndex);

END LOOP;

END build_return;

BEGIN

separate_sections;

build_return;

RETURN v_return_value;

END format_for_sort;

END p_test_tab1;
/

select a
from test_tab1
order by p_test_tab1.format_for_sort(a)
/
Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #329012 is a reply to message #329011] Mon, 23 June 2008 13:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Michel Cadot
Messages: 58849
Registered: March 2007
Location: Nanterre, France, http://...
Senior Member
Account Moderator
I don't know if your solution works (I don't even know if it compiles) but I have to say:
1/
It is NOT formated and so unreadable. Read OraFAQ Forum Guide, especially "How to format your post?" section.
Make sure that lines of code do not exceed 80 characters when you format.
Indent the code (See SQL Formatter).
Use the "Preview Message" button to verify.

2/
Quote:
EXCEPTION WHEN OTHERS THEN NULL;

This is one of the worst things, no the worst thing you can do in PL/SQL programming.

3/
"LPAD(v_test_number, 5, '0')", don't you know TO_CHAR function?

4/
Remove useless empty lines, it does not clear the text and lead to a several pages procedure hard to follow

5/
Post the SQL*Plus session showing it works.

6/
Do you think it is better than a SQL solution?

7/
Where is the function based index?

8/
Where is the view?

9/
Where is the added column?

10/
Where is the trigger?

Regards
Michel

[Updated on: Mon, 23 June 2008 13:36]

Report message to a moderator

Re: SORTING WITH ALPHA-NUMERIC [message #329024 is a reply to message #329012] Mon, 23 June 2008 14:09 Go to previous message
rdebruyn
Messages: 17
Registered: June 2008
Location: Ottawa
Junior Member
Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34
I don't know if your solution works (I don't even know if it compiles)


I have to hope you're capable of finding out if a package compiles or not. What exactly is your problem? You complain on and on.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

1/
It is NOT formated and so unreadable.)

At least you gave some helpful comments as to how to better post answers. Thanks for that. Otherwise see above.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

2/
Quote:
EXCEPTION WHEN OTHERS THEN NULL;

This is one of the worst things, no the worst thing you can do in PL/SQL programming.

I'm going to code a quick response and yes there may be some clean-up necessary in the poster's final deliverable code. This is more than enough to get him started. Besides that, show me in this case how it will fail to work.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

3/
"LPAD(v_test_number, 5, '0')", don't you know TO_CHAR function?.

Don't you know LPAD function?

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

4/
Remove useless empty lines, it does not clear the text and lead to a several pages procedure hard to follow

See above.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

5/
Post the SQL*Plus session showing it works.

You've tried this bully approach to get me to provide the code. YOU show ME it doesn't work.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

6/
Do you think it is better than a SQL solution?


Yes.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

7/
Where is the function based index?

Follow the thread.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

8/
Where is the view?

Follow the thread.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

9/
Where is the added column?

Follow the thread.

Michel Cadot wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 14:34

10/
Where is the trigger?

Follow the thread.

I agreed with you that the function based index would not help in the order by.

You pushed the idea that a developer could not create columns, triggers and functions. I told you that the idea was sound and that the implementation could change depending on the capabilities of the developer. You then challenge me for an actual working solution. I supply you with one AND YOU'RE NOT EVEN THE ONE POSTING THE THREAD!

You've torn apart the thread started by subhadip.chanda. For what gain? Is it your plan to torment all users on this site for your own pleasure? If you see yourself as the almighty god of Oracle, I hope your making millions. If you don't have privillege to create columns and triggers, I doubt it.

From now on I know of one person's comment to ignore. The purpose of forums like this is to help others not use it as your personal flame site.

[Updated on: Mon, 23 June 2008 14:15]

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: Error creating procedure
Next Topic: DBMS_JOB Scheduler Issue
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Aug 21 01:56:39 CDT 2014

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.09613 seconds