Re: PL/SQL and big number in 10g

Michel Cadot schrieb:
> Can someone explain me the difference in PL/SQL behaviour on numbers in 10g?
> (Executed on Windows XP 32-bit)
>
> SQL> select * from v$version where rownum=1;
> BANNER
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.6.0 - Production
>
> 1 row selected.
>
> SQL> declare t number;
> 2 begin t := 1024*1024*1024*1024;
> 3 end;
> 4 /
>
> PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> SQL> select * from v$version where rownum=1;
> BANNER
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.1.0 - Prod
>
> 1 row selected.
>
> SQL> declare t number;
> 2 begin t := 1024*1024*1024*1024;
> 3 end;
> 4 /
> declare t number;
> *
> ERROR at line 1:
> ORA-01426: numeric overflow
> ORA-06512: at line 2
>
> SQL> select 1024*1024*1024*1024 from dual;
> 1024*1024*1024*1024
> --------------------
> 1099511627776
>
> 1 row selected.
>
> SQL> declare t number;
> 2 begin t := 1099511627776;
> 3 end;
> 4 /
>
> PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
>
> SQL> declare t number;
> 2 begin t := 1048576 * 1048576;
> 3 end;
> 4 /
> declare t number;
> *
> ERROR at line 1:
> ORA-01426: numeric overflow
> ORA-06512: at line 2
>
>
> SQL> declare t number;
> 2 begin
> 3 t := 1048576;
> 4 t := t * t;
> 5 end;
> 6 /
>
> PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
>
> I suspect that operations on constant are now internally made with
> binary_integer/pls_integer that is with 32 bits integers.
> Can someone confirm?
>
> Thanks
> Michel Cadot
>
>

Note 351965.1 (they changed it indeed in 10g)

Best regards

Maxim Received on Wed Jan 11 2006 - 11:19:18 CST