Re: order by question

On 24 Okt, 13:08, sbr..._at_yahoo.com wrote:
> On 24 Okt, 12:46, sybrandb <sybra..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 24 okt, 10:56, sbr..._at_yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > > On 23 Okt, 17:34, sybra..._at_hccnet.nl wrote:
>
> > > > On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 07:34:51 -0700 (PDT), sbr..._at_yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > >I have not been able to get a resultset which is unsorted acording to
> > > > >x.z but need to know that this would not happen in a productive
> > > > >environment.
>
> > > > By definition all SQL prodiuces a set. The set is always an
> > > > *unordered* collection *by design*, because that is mathematical
> > > > theory.
> > > > Ergo: Oracle does NOT guarantee any resultset is according to any
> > > > order, when there is no order by clause in the top level of the query.
> > > > It would be very silly to 'rely' on a specific ordering, and raises
> > > > suspicions your 'productive environment' is not so productive, as it
> > > > is processing a set as a bunch of records.
> > > > Which it shouldn't as that wouldn't scale.
>
> > > > --
> > > > Sybrand Bakker
> > > > Senior Oracle DBA
>
> > > If you dont have anything valuable to add then dont. Do you actually
> > > have an example of when the resultset is not ordered because I have
> > > not been able to produce it. If yes then please say so. That would be
> > > valuable information for me. I already know that "Oracle does NOT
> > > guarantee any resultset is according to any order, when there is no
> > > order by clause in the top level of the query". That is pretty much
> > > basic stuff and this information is not valuable to me. And yes the
> > > system is productive. The select is in a function which returns a
> > > sys_refcursor to a java application. The select is based on tables
> > > where several of them contains more than 10 million records and is
> > > working well thus far. I do not see why it would not be scalable.
>
> > > Slavko- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
>
> > > - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
>
> > If you are not interested in hearing you shouldn't rely on default
> > ordering, why post an insulting response?
>
> > --
> > Sybrand Bakker
> > Senior Oracle DBA- D�lj citerad text -
>
> > - Visa citerad text -
>
> Sybrand:
> You were not answering my question. I thought it was obviuos from my
> question that I understand that Oracle does not guarantee the correct
> sort order but that I have not been able to produce a wrong order. And
> then you were questioning if this really was for a productive
> environment or not and that it would not be scalable. I found that you
> did not try to be helpful but instead tried to belittle my question as
> being stupid. If that was not your intent then I apologize. If you can
> produce an example with wrong ordering I would be grateful.
>
> Jim:
> I have tried to search on askTom but not found anything. I have only
> found out that one cannot rely on Oracle to order by when records were
> inserted (which I already knew). If you have a link I would be very
> thankful.- D�lj citerad text -
>
> - Visa citerad text -

Found the answer:

http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:1137689100346245972 Received on Fri Oct 24 2008 - 08:44:52 CDT