Re: inconsistent results make me grumpy ( where is the 904? )
From: Jonathan Lewis <jonathan_at_jlcomp.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 11:43:02 +0100
Message-ID: <qOadnUNk7MApOZDTnZ2dnUVZ8t-dnZ2d_at_bt.com>
"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:iuk618$tgt$1_at_dont-email.me...
> Jonathan Lewis wrote,on my timestamp of 1/07/2011 6:23 AM:
>
>>
>>
>> It's expected behaviour. Think correlated subqueries.
>>
>> If a column referenced inside a subquery does not belong to any of the
>> tables in the subquery then Oracle assumes that it is a correlating
>> column
>> that comes from the next layer out.
>>
>>
>
> Yup, that's what I'm seeing as well.
> (A case of Oracle trying to be too smart for its own good?)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 11:43:02 +0100
Message-ID: <qOadnUNk7MApOZDTnZ2dnUVZ8t-dnZ2d_at_bt.com>
"Noons" <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au> wrote in message news:iuk618$tgt$1_at_dont-email.me...
> Jonathan Lewis wrote,on my timestamp of 1/07/2011 6:23 AM:
>
>>
>>
>> It's expected behaviour. Think correlated subqueries.
>>
>> If a column referenced inside a subquery does not belong to any of the
>> tables in the subquery then Oracle assumes that it is a correlating
>> column
>> that comes from the next layer out.
>>
>>
>
> Yup, that's what I'm seeing as well.
> (A case of Oracle trying to be too smart for its own good?)
No, it's standard SQL
If it didn't do this, how would you write correlated subqueries ?
-- Regards Jonathan Lewis http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.comReceived on Fri Jul 01 2011 - 05:43:02 CDT