Re: Working with huge tables of chronological data

"Jonathan Lewis" <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:...
>
> "charely" <nospam_at_skynet.be> wrote in message
> news:461a24bd$0$13860$ba620e4c_at_news.skynet.be...
>>
>
> Charley,
>
> You are correct - I lost sight of that entire branch
> of the thread. It is your solution, minus the boundary
> condition that you had captured in your version of
> the code. (I leave the need for < or <= operators
> to the original poster to decide - the choice depends
> on his exact requirements).
>
> I think the 'select max(timed) from ta' option in your
> original solution is actually more elegant than picking
> an arbitrary future date - it doesn't add materially to
> the resource usage as it will only execute once through
> a min/max range scan.
>
>
> The answer to Charles Hooper's question in the follow-up
> to your original post: where did the bind variable come from ?
> It's how Oracle handles the correlated column from the outer
> table as it generates the plan for the correlated subquery.
>

charely

Apologies for spelling your name incorrectly. I let the spell-checker "correct" what I had typed before my brain caught up with what I was reading.

-- 
Regards

Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com

Author: Cost Based Oracle: Fundamentals
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/cbo_book/ind_book.html

The Co-operative Oracle Users' FAQ
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk/faq/ind_faq.html