RE: to_number question

From: Wolfgang Breitling <breitliw_at_centrexcc.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 05:05:29 -0600
Message-Id: <6.1.0.6.2.20040715045603.02db5b28@pop.centrexcc.com>

What do you mean "the unhinted one ain't right". Your assumption about relational databases ain't right. You are assuming that the sql is processed in a particular order. But the underlying basis is relational theory (hence the name) NOT procedural processing. Your query contains several operators on the base set (the table): a projection (your select clause), a filter (your where clause) and a function on some fields (your to_number function). You were assuming that the filter would be applied before the function, but you can not assume that, you have to explicitly request it. Just as you can not assume that the resultset is returned in a particular order, you have to explicitly request it with an "order by" clause.

At 09:51 PM 7/14/2004, you wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > It would be interesting to see the execution plans to both hinted and
> > unhinted versions...
>
>If I get time. Whatever they are, the unhinted one ain't right.
>"It's never easy." (Dylan Hunt)

Regards

Wolfgang Breitling
Centrex Consulting Corporation
www.centrexcc.com

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.

--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Thu Jul 15 2004 - 06:02:43 CDT