Re: inconsistent results make me grumpy ( where is the 904? )
From: Noons <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 22:21:08 +1000
Message-ID: <iuke38$c2h$1_at_dont-email.me>
Jonathan Lewis wrote,on my timestamp of 1/07/2011 8:43 PM:
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 22:21:08 +1000
Message-ID: <iuke38$c2h$1_at_dont-email.me>
Jonathan Lewis wrote,on my timestamp of 1/07/2011 8:43 PM:
>>> 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 ?
>
You're right, of course. I always write those using aliases for table names and add them to the column names, makes for much easier reading. But it's not strictly necessitated by the standard. Received on Fri Jul 01 2011 - 07:21:08 CDT