Re: query issue

> > hey, what's up ?
> > I'm writing in a It Professional newsgroup
> > I'm expecting to find people smart enough to understand even if I
> > don't write it down entirely what I was trying to say.. ;)
>
> As sybrand would tell you, all our crystal balls are broken.
ok, I said:
'it doesn't work',
I should have said:
'it doesn't work for my purpouse',
mea culpa..

> Let's see, this query is DIFFERENT from the one in your original post, so it's
> good we didn't try to answer based on that post, right?
>
> How about either explaining your business problem in prose OR provide a small
> set of sample data to demonstrate your problem? We still have no clue why you
> would want to write a query like that.
>

I rougly explained the beahaviour in the starting post: anyway a remote webservice broadcasts record variations for a mobile carrier: if some bloke decides to change carrier, he still holds the number, the carrierid change and a new record is broadcasted

> Just some additional thoughts:
>
> * DISTINCT is bad practice, IMHO.
>
> * Rather than a subquery, why not use an in-line VIEW?
>

the query itself has to go inside a database view

> * First get the logic right. Only after testing proves there's a performance
> issue should you even think about optimization. (and, lucky you, at that point
> you can do a trace and find exactly WHRE the bottleneck is)
>
> * There are no stupid questions.

except the ones raising a RTFM exception ;)

/**********/

I tried the solution proposed by Kibenha and looks great,the tests are very good since the project is 9i based, I think I'll go for it

thank you all, guys
jc Received on Mon Feb 09 2004 - 05:36:00 CST