Advantage of SQL Query (Strucutred Query) over SQL Query

What is the advantage of a Region Type 'SQL Query (Structured Query)' over 'SQL Query'?
I just became curious when comparing the results of the Master Detail Wizard, and the Report and Form Wizard.

Greg,
From a functionality standpoint, there are no advantages one has over the other. "Structured queries" are the result of you stepping through the easy report wizard. This means you didn't have to know the SQL required to produce the result set you're after. Creating a SQL report requires knowledge of SQL.
Sergio

Similar Messages

PL/SQL function body returning SQL query - ORA-06502: PL/SQL: numeric or value error

I'm attempting to dynamically generate a rather large SQL query via the "PL/SQL function body returning SQL query" report region option. The SQL query generated will possibly be over 32K. When I execute my page, I sometimes receive the "ORA-06502: PL/SQL: numeric or value error" which points to a larger than 32K query that was generated. I've seen other posts in the forum related to this dynamic SQL size limitation issue, but they are older (pre-2010) and point to the 32K limit of the DNS (EXECUTE IMMEDIATE) and DBMS_SQL. I found this post (dynamic sql enhancements in 11g) which discusses 11g no longer having the 32K size limitation for generating dynamic SQL. Our environment is on 11gR2 and using ApEx 4.2.1. I do not know which dynamic SQL method -- DNS or DBMS_SQL -- ApEx 4.2.1 is using. Can someone clarify for me which dynamic SQL method ApEx uses to implement the "PL/SQL function body returning SQL query" option?
As a test, I created a page on apex.oracle.com with a report region with the following source:
declare
l_stub varchar2(25) := 'select * from sys.dual ';
l_sql clob := l_stub || 'union all ';
br     number(3) := 33;
begin
while length ( l_sql ) < 34000 loop
    l_sql := l_sql || l_stub || 'union all ';
end loop;
l_sql := l_sql || l_stub;
for i in 1 .. ceil ( length ( l_sql ) / br ) loop
    dbms_output.put_line ( dbms_lob.substr ( l_sql, br, ( ( i - 1 ) * br ) + 1 ) );
end loop;
return l_sql;
end;
The dbms_output section is there to be able to run this code in SQL*Plus and confirm the size of the SQL is indeed larger than 32K. When running this in SQL*Plus, the procedure is successful and produces a proper SQL statement which can be executed. When I put this into the report region on apex.oracle.com, I get the ORA-06502 error.
I can certainly implement a work-around for my issue by creating a 'Before Header' process on the page which populates an ApEx collection with the data I am returning and then the report can simply select from the collection, but according to documentation, the above 32K limitation should be resolved in 11g. Thoughts?
Shane.

What setting do you use in your report properties - especially in Type and in Region Source?
If you have Type="SQL Query", then you should have a SELECT statement in the Region Source. Something like: SELECT .... FROM ... WHERE
According to the ERR-1101 error message, you have probably set Type to "SQL Query (PL/SQL function body returning SQL query)". In this situation APEX expects you to write a body of a PL/SQL function, that will generate the text of a SQL query that APEX should run. So it can be something like:
declare
mycond varchar2(4000);
begin
if :P1_REPORT_SEARCH is not null THEN
mycond:='WHERE LAST_NAME like :P1_REPORT_SEARCH ||''%''';
end if;
return 'select EMPLOYEE_ID, FIRST_NAME, LAST_NAME from EMPLOYEES ' ||mycond;
end;
And for escaping - are you interested in escaping the LIKE wildcards, or the quotes?
For escaping the wildcards in LIKE function so that when the user enters % you will find a record with % and not all functions, look into the SQL Reference:
http://download-uk.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14200/conditions007.htm
(You would than need to change the code of your function accordingly).
If you are interested in escaping the quotes, try to avoid concatenating the values entered by the user into the SQL. If you can, use bind variables instead - as I have in my example above. If you start concatenating the values into the text of SQL, you are open to SQLInjection - user can enter anything, even things that will break your SQL. If you really need to allow users to choose the operator, I would probably give them a separate combo for operators and a textfield for values, than you could check if the operator is one of the allowed ones and create the condition accordingly - and than still use bind variable for inserting the filtering value into the query.

Please tune my query written in PL/SQL.

Hi there,
I really appreciate you if could tune my query.
Here I am using tow tables PRDT_MASTER with 7 thosound records, REG_SUM with 50 records.
I get nearly 10 thosound records to my cursor.
From these 10 thosound records I have to prepare an SQL STATEMENT with dynamic sql.
That query selects sum() from ACTUALDATA table (This table contains nearly 75thosound records).
Then that data has to be inserted in to another table PROD_BRAND.
I had a predesigned tables where i can't change or create any index, Infact no tables any no index. There is no primary key on the columns also.
Now my problem is while i execute this procedure it is taking nearly 1 hour. I don't know why it is taking that much time. Is it because of dynamic sql and without any indexes?
Or IS IT NECESSARY for me to change anything???
Is there any alteranative way for me to over come from this problem....
Your help is really appreciatable bench mark for me.
I HAVE A TYPE FETCHCURSOR FOR REFCURSOR.
PROCEDURE PROD_MASTER_PRO
     (DATE1      IN DATE
     ,DATE2 IN DATE
     ,TYPE     IN VARCHAR2
     )      AS
          MAINCUR                MYPACK.FETCHCURSOR;
     COU                     NUMBER(20);
     V_SUM                    NUMBER(20);
          V_SBUCODE               VARCHAR2(255);
          V_CATCODE                VARCHAR2(255);
          V_BRANDCODE               VARCHAR2(255);
          V_PRODCODE           VARCHAR2(255);
          V_TYPE                    VARCHAR2(10):= UPPER(TYPE);
          REGNAME                    REG_SUM.REGION%TYPE;
          CONDITION               REG_SUM.COND%TYPE;
          QRY                         VARCHAR2(2000);
     BEGIN
--//This is for different catcodes codes
          OPEN MAINCUR FOR
          SELECT DISTINCT SBUCODE,CATCODE,PRODCODE,REGION ,COND
          FROM PRDT_MASTER, REG_SUM
          WHERE PRDT_MASTER.SBUCODE=REG_SUM.SUB
          AND PRDT_MASTER.PRODCODE IS NOT NULL
          ORDER BY SBUCODE,CATCODE,PRODCODE;
          LOOP FETCH MAINCUR INTO V_SBUCODE,V_CATCODE,V_PRODCODE,REGNAME,CONDITION;
          EXIT WHEN MAINCUR%NOTFOUND;
               --SELECT NVL(SUM(GROSS),0) INTO V_SUM FROM ACTUALDATA WHERE PROD_CODE=V_PRODCODE
               --AND (TRUNC(INV_DATE) BETWEEN DATE1 AND DATE2);
               QRY:=     'SELECT NVL(SUM(GROSS),0) FROM ACTUALDATA     ';
               QRY:=     QRY||'     WHERE PROD_CODE= :V_PRODCODE_BIND ';
               QRY:=     QRY||'     AND (TRUNC(INV_DATE) BETWEEN :DATE1_BIND AND :DATE2_BIND      )';
               QRY:=     QRY||'     AND '||CONDITION;
               EXECUTE IMMEDIATE QRY INTO V_SUM     USING V_PRODCODE ,DATE1,DATE2;
               INSERT INTO PROD_BRAND
               (     PROD_CODE,     SBUCODE ,     CODE ,
                    SUM ,     TYPE ,     CODE_TYPE,
                    REGION
               )     VALUES
               (     V_PRODCODE,     V_SBUCODE,     V_CATCODE,
                    V_SUM,          PROD_MASTER_PRO.TYPE,     'THERAPY',
                    REGNAME
          END LOOP;
          CLOSE MAINCUR;
          COMMIT;
     END;
regards,
Khaleel.

Parsing SQL is complex. Parsing SQL dynamically at run-time inside a FCAG policy function to determine what predicate to add, is a terribly bad idea. Performance wise and security wise.
Can you be more specific (basic example) of what you are trying to achieve? And more importantly, what business requirement you are attempting to solve with this approach?
Perhaps if we understand the full details, we can better assist you.

Is the query analyzer part of SQL Server?

Hey all,
I have installed SQL Server 2005 on windows 2003 server. It did not install the query analyzer.
Is the query analyzer part of SQL Server or do we need to install it separately?
Thank you,
Bye.

Is there something about this question that is related to Oracle? It would appear that you'd want to ask this over in an appropriate Microsoft SQL Server forum...
Justin

Use evdre to query data from a SQL View

Hi all
I believe that it is possible to use evdre to query data from a SQL View. If this is possible then how does one go about setting it up in the evdre options (assuming that the view has already been created)?
Regards,
Byron

Byron, perhaps this is no longer supported, it might be worth opening up a case at service.sap.com on this. However, I did find the following on Page 11 of the "Usages and Considerations of EVDRE" pdf file. This doc is imbedded in the helpfile for BPC 7 SP5 (which was released in August of 2009, well after note 1315011 was last updated.
It looks like you are limited to one custom view per application, since you have to name the view in a parameter at the APPLICATION level. Go into BPC Administration, login to the application related to the custom view, choose "Set Application Parameters" and enter the name of the view to the Application Parameter called "EVDRE_QUERYVIEWNAME" If it is not listed, go ahead and create it at the bottom of the Application parameter screen.
Also: I interpreted the following info from Page 10 of the same doc:
In your EVDRE, set the following options:
QueryEngine: MANUAL
QueryType: enter either NEXJ OR TUPLE see below:
NEXJ - Use two-dimensional queries using the nonemptycrossjoin function
TUPLE - Use two-dimensional queries using tuples"
And I'm assuming you'd enter a Y for the following two parameters:
QueryViewName
"..to enforce the query engine to use a used-defined SQL view of the fact tables, when trying to read the values using SQL queries. This option is typically used in conjunction with the SQLOnly option (see below). "
Option SQLOnly
"..to enforce the query engine to only execute SQL queries, when reading data. This can be achieved using this option."

How to make sql to use index/make to query to perform better

Hi,
I have 2 sql query which results the same.
But both has difference in SQL trace.
create table test_table
(u_id number(10),
u_no number(4),
s_id number(10),
s_no number(4),
o_id number(10),
o_no number(4),
constraint pk_test primary key(u_id, u_no));
insert into test_table(u_id, u_no, s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no)
values (2007030301, 1, 1001, 1, 2001, 1);
insert into test_table(u_id, u_no, s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no)
values (2007030302, 1, 1001, 1, 2001, 2);
insert into test_table(u_id, u_no, s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no)
values (2007030303, 1, 1001, 1, 2001, 3);
insert into test_table(u_id, u_no, s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no)
values (2007030304, 1, 1001, 1, 2001, 4);
insert into test_table(u_id, u_no, s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no)
values (2007030305, 1, 1002, 1, 1001, 2);
insert into test_table(u_id, u_no, s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no)
values (2007030306, 1, 1002, 1, 1002, 1);
commit;
CREATE INDEX idx_test_s_id ON test_table(s_id, s_no);
set autotrace on
select s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no
from test_table
where s_id <> o_id
and s_no <> o_no
union all
select o_id, o_no, s_id, s_no
from test_table
where s_id <> o_id
and s_no <> o_no;
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=6 Card=8 Bytes=416)
1 0 UNION-ALL
2 1 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=4 Bytes=208)
3 1 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=4 Bytes=208)
Statistics
223 recursive calls
2 db block gets
84 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
701 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
508 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
5 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
8 rows processed
-- i didnt understand why the above query is not using the index idx_test_s_id.
-- But still it is faster
select s_id, s_no, o_id, o_no
from test_table
where (u_id, u_no) in
(select u_id, u_no from test_table
minus
select u_id, u_no from test_table
where s_id = o_id
or s_no = o_no)
union all
select o_id, o_no, s_id, s_no
from test_table
where (u_id, u_no) in
(select u_id, u_no from test_table
minus
select u_id, u_no from test_table
where s_id = o_id
or s_no = o_no);
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=16 Card=2 Bytes=156)
1 0 UNION-ALL
2 1 FILTER
3 2 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=6 Bytes=468)
4 2 MINUS
5 4 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TEST' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=26)
6 4 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=78)
7 6 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TEST' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1)
8 1 FILTER
9 8 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=6 Bytes=468)
10 8 MINUS
11 10 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TEST' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=26)
12 10 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=78)
13 12 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TEST' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1)
Statistics
53 recursive calls
8 db block gets
187 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
701 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
508 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
4 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
8 rows processed
-- The above query is using index PK_TEST. But still it has FULL SCAN to the
-- table two times it has the more cost.
1st query --> SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=6 Card=8 Bytes=416)
2nd query --> SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=16 Card=2 Bytes=156)
My queries are:
1) performance wise which query is better?
2) how do i make the 1st query to use an index
3) is there any other method to get the same result by using any index
Appreciate your immediate help.
Best regards
Muthu

Hi William
Nice...it works.. I have added "o_id" and "o_no" are in part of the index
and now the query uses the index
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=2 Card=8 Bytes=416)
1 0 UNION-ALL
2 1 INDEX (FULL SCAN) OF 'IDX_TEST_S_ID' (INDEX) (Cost=1 Card=4 Bytes=208)
3 1 INDEX (FULL SCAN) OF 'IDX_TEST_S_ID' (INDEX) (Cost=1 Card=4 Bytes=208)
Statistics
7 recursive calls
0 db block gets
21 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
701 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
507 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
8 rows processed
But my questions are:
1) In a where clause, if "<>" condition is used, then, whether the system will use the index. Because I have observed in several situations even though the column in where clause is indexed, since the where condition is "like" or "is null/is not null"
then the index is not used. Same as like this, i assumed, if we use <> then indexes will not be used. Is it true?
2) Now, after adding "o_id" and "o_no" columns to the index, the Execution plan is:
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=2 Card=8 Bytes=416)
1 0 UNION-ALL
2 1 INDEX (FULL SCAN) OF 'IDX_TEST_S_ID' (INDEX) (Cost=1 Card=4 Bytes=208)
3 1 INDEX (FULL SCAN) OF 'IDX_TEST_S_ID' (INDEX) (Cost=1 Card=4 Bytes=208)
Before it was :
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=6 Card=8 Bytes=416)
1 0 UNION-ALL
2 1 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=4 Bytes=208)
3 1 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'TEST_TABLE' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=4 Bytes=208)
Difference only in Cost (reduced), not in Card, Bytes.
Can you explain, how can i decide which makes the performace better (Cost / Card / Bytes). Full Scan / Range Scan?
On statistics also:
Before:
Statistics
52 recursive calls
0 db block gets
43 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
701 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
507 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
8 rows processed
After:
Statistics
7 recursive calls
0 db block gets
21 consistent gets
0 physical reads
0 redo size
701 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
507 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
2 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
0 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
8 rows processed
Difference in recursive calls & consistent gets.
Which one shows the query with better performance?
Please explain..
Regards
Muthu

Query data from MS SQL db through Oracle ? By using JAVA ?

Hi folks,
I would like to sync our one table in oracle db with table in different system, stored in MS SQL database.
What would be the easiest option for connection from Oracle to MS SQL db to be able to query data from MS SQL through some Oracle package?
If possible, I would like to keep all "tricky steps" within Oracle database. I heard about option with Java, but so far we have no experience with java in Oracle.
Our database: Oracle 11g Database Standard Edition One
Many thanks,
Tomas

C:\Users\tomeo>dg4pwd HELIOS
ORACLE Gateway Password Utility
Constructing password file for Gateway SID HELIOS
For user account SYSTEM
OPW-00001: Unable to open password-file (RC=0)
C:\Users\tomeo>

Help needed in SQL performance - Using CASE in SQL statement versus 2 query

Hi,
I have a requirement to find count from a bunch of tables.
The SQL I have gives the count of all members.
I have created 2 queries to find count of active and inactive members.
The key difference is only the active dates.
Each query takes 20 seconds to execute.
I modified the SQL to use CASE statement in the SELECT.
So after the data is fetched the CASE statement will evaluate the active date and gives 2 counts (active and inactive)
Is it advisable to use this approach. Will CASE improve SQL performance ? I have to justify this.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Thanks,
J

Hi,
If it can be done in single SQL do it in single SQL.
You said:
Will CASE improve SQL performance There can be both cases to prove if the performance is better or worse.
In your case you should tell us how it is.
Regards,
Bhushan

Advantages of using Bex WAD over Bex Query Designer?

Can anyone tell me the advantages of using Bex WAD over Bex Query Designer?

Hi Shiva,
WAD has many advantages when compared with Query Designer. few of those are
You can include Radio Buttons, Push Buttons, Check Boxs.....
You can include more than one report in one WAD Report
Completely u can make fancy as much as requried ....
Many graphs and chars are can be included .....
data from Views can be viewed
Many..many....

How to add a dynamic where clause for a sql based VO with group by query?

Hi,
Here is my case, I have a sql query based VO with the query like "select status, count(*) StatusCount from my_table group by status". Now I used the following java code trying to dynamically add the where clause to my VO to filter the rows based the type attribute in my DB table.
vo.setWhereClause("type='MyType1' ");
vo.executeQuery();
Then I got the sql syntax error. Looks like the ADF has added the where clause to the end of my sql so my sql becomes "select status, count(*) StatusCount from my_table group by status where type='MyType1' ". But what I expected was the correct syntax "select status, count(*) StatusCount from my_table where type='MyType1' group by status".
Does anyone know if this is an ADF bug? Or is there any other way to achieve my goal?
Thanks,
Chunyang
Edited by: Chunyang on Dec 13, 2012 9:09 PM

Hi,
When you use setWhereClause on the VO, it is applied on top of the VO query. I.e, assume your VO has the following query.
select empno, ename from empNow, if you apply the where clause programatically, only the two attributes that you are using in the select statement could be used. I.e
select * from (select empno, ename from emp) where ename='KING' - VALID
select * from (select empno, ename from emp) where deptno=10 - INVALID (because the inner query - the one you've defined as query for your vo does not have deptno attribute selected)If you would need to set a dynamic where clause, you need to make them available in your select statement / use bind variables.
-Arun

Query hint to force SQL to use a temporary table in a CTE query?

Hi,
is it possible to tell SQL Server to create a temporary table by itself when I'm using a CTE in my query?
I have a query starting with a CTE where I group by my record, then another recursive CTE use the first CTE and finally my select statement like:
with cte as (select a,b,c,row_number() ... from mytable group by a,b,c)
, cte2(select .... from cte A where rownum =1
union all select ... from cte B inner join cte2 C on ......
select * from cte2
this query is very very slow, but if I store the first CTE into a temporary table and then cte2 consume my temp table rather than the CTE, the query is very fast.
creating the temp table took 10sec and the select took 20sec
while the initial query didnt return anything after 2minutes!!!
so what can I try to do to have the query running in less than 30sec without creating the temp table first?
is there a query hint which can be used to tell SQL Server to convert the CTE into a temp table?
as I have a lot of query to manage, I want to simplify my model without relying in temporary tables every time I suffer this issue...
thanks.

What is your SQL Server version?
There is no hint to materialize results of cte into a temp table, so the solution you tried is the best you can have.
I think the idea of materializing CTE into a temp table was already proposed on Connect. Try searching for this and vote.
For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Becker's Law
My blog
My TechNet articles

How to return in pl/sql the tuples of an sql query comming several tables

I have a select query whose result comes from several tables. The question is how to return the tuples of the select query using a pl/sql function. In othe words, is it possible to define a construct structure to store the values of sql query and return that construct. if yes how to define such a construct where its elements comming from several tables.
I appreciate very much ur help

The way to return a resultset from a function is with a cursor variable. The lazy of doing this is using a weakly-typed ref cursor (in 9i use the predefined SYS_REFCURSOR).
Cheers, APC

Query running ok in SQL but giving error in form trigger

Hi guys
here is the query
SELECT NVL(BGM_PERAMT,0) INTO PERAMT FROM BROKERAGE_MASTER
WHERE     BGM_BROKERAGETYPE = 'BR01' AND BGM_PERAMT <> 0
The above query working fine in SQL but giving following error in when_button_pressed trigger
[In a host language program, all records have been fetched. The return code from the fetch was +4 indicating that all records have been returned from the SQL query. ]
please give me the solution for this problem.
It is very urgent
regards
asha

ok below is the code
CURSOR RESALE_BROKERAGE IS SELECT am_brokerCd resalebrcd,'' resalesbrcd,NVL(SUM(AM_AMT),0) RESALE_AMT,COUNT(AM_RESALENO) TOTCNT,NVL(SUM(AM_UNITSAPPLD),0) RESALE_UNITS
FROMRNT_RESALE_MASTER
WHERE am_brokercd is not null AND AM_PROCTAG='Y' AND
(to_date(to_char(AM_PROCDT,'DD/MON/YYYY')) BETWEEN
to_date(to_char(:rnt_broker_date.fromdt,'DD/MON/YYYY')) AND
to_date(to_char(:rnt_broker_date.todate,'DD/MON/YYYY')))
GROUP BY am_brokerCd
UNION
SELECT AM_BROKERCD resalebrcd,
am_subbrokercd resalesbrcd,
NVL(SUM(AM_AMT),0) RESALE_AMT,COUNT(AM_RESALENO) TOTCNT,
NVL(SUM(AM_UNITSAPPLD),0) RESALE_UNITS
FROM RNT_RESALE_MASTER
WHERE     am_brokercd is not null AND AM_PROCTAG='Y' AND AM_BROKERCD = 'ARN-9760' AND (to_date(to_charAM_PROCDT,'DD/MON/YYYY')) BETWEEN
to_date(to_char(:rnt_broker_date.fromdt,'DD/MON/YYYY')) AND
to_date(to_char(:rnt_broker_date.todate,'DD/MON/YYYY')))
GROUP BY AM_BROKERCD,am_subbrokercd;
Asha

Query output similar to sql plus results

Is it possible to configure SQLDeveloper to output the query result similar to sql plus ?
I want to print the field names of the sql input, something as:
OWD_ID     seconds   policies/s     COUNT(OWD_ID)     MIN(OWE_PRC_DT)     MAX(OWE_PRC_DT)
5174           872       17             14892                 06/11/2009 12:53:31 06/11/2009 13:08:03 Thanks
Claudio
Edited by: Claudio Miranda on Nov 10, 2009 11:49 AM
Edited by: Claudio Miranda on Nov 10, 2009 11:51 AM

Claudio Miranda wrote:
Is it possible to configure SQLDeveloper to output the query result similar to sql plus ?
I want to print the field names of the sql input, something as:
OWD_ID     seconds   policies/s     COUNT(OWD_ID)     MIN(OWE_PRC_DT)     MAX(OWE_PRC_DT)
5174           872       17             14892                 06/11/2009 12:53:31 06/11/2009 13:08:03 Thanks
Claudio
As far as I know, no :(

How to view complete date stamp in query result view in sql developer?

Hi,
In the query result, the date present in db is shown as DD-MM-YYYY format but I want to view the complete date stamp. When I view the same data in aqua data studio, I see the complete time stamp. Please let me know if I need to do some settings in Oracle SQL Developer so that complete date is shown?
How to view complete date stamp in query result view in sql developer?
Thanks in advance,
Vineet

864793 wrote:
Hi,
In the query result, the date present in db is shown as DD-MM-YYYY format but I want to view the complete date stamp. When I view the same data in aqua data studio, I see the complete time stamp. Please let me know if I need to do some settings in Oracle SQL Developer so that complete date is shown?
How to view complete date stamp in query result view in sql developer?
Thanks in advance,
VineetAlternatively you can execute below
set nls_date_format='DD-MM-YYYY HH24:MI:SS';Regards,
Achyut K

Advantage of SQL Query (Strucutred Query) over SQL Query

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for