Order by upper(username)

Hi,
I've a view with a quite big SQL, joining some tables.
I need to order that view using a text field.
As Oracle is case sensitive, I've to include the field of the ORDER BY clause into the UPPER function.
On that field there is no index.
This operation is getting down the performance.
What do you suggest?
Can Oracle Text help me some how?
Thanks in advance.

Hi again!
If the field in your view consists of two or more concatenated columns then your index should consists of the same combination of columns. E. g.
Your view is like that:
CREATE OR REPLACE view conview
(employee_id, name)
AS
SELECT employee_id, UPPER(last_name || ', ' || first_name)
FROM employees;Then you index should look like this:
CREATE INDEX conview_idx
ON hr.employees(UPPER(last_name || ', ' || first_name));I hope that this will help you along.
Best Regards
Florian W.

Similar Messages

JPQL How to ORDER BY UPPER ?

hi,
how can i do an order by upper/lower in JPQL? i am getting the below exception while trying to use this:
EJBException:javax.ejb.EJBException: EJB Exception: ; nested exceptio
n is:
<openjpa-1.1.0-r422266:657916 nonfatal user error> org.apache.openjpa.persistence.ArgumentException: Encountered "lower" at character 73, but expecte
d: ["AVG", "COUNT", "MAX", "MIN", "SUM", <IDENTIFIER>].
i am using the following namedquery
@NamedQuery(name="getProductbyType",query="SELECT t FROM ProductBean t WHERE t.productType = :productType order by lower(t.title)"),
thanks
Edited by: badguitarist on Feb 26, 2009 1:51 AM

What is your target database????
badguitarist wrote:
also am still getting the same error when i use ORDER BY ABS(t.title)ABS() is used for Integer Data type fields... and here i can understand that title field is a Varchar and it will
definitely fail.
I am able to execute the queries successfully in DB2 db.
I have even tried UPPER() in Order By clause and i got the result accordingly.......
Edited by: MPA2009 on Mar 2, 2009 3:04 AM

Field Order -Progressive, Upper or Lower? (Interlacing?)

Hi there,
I am fairly new to exporting videos in premiere pro and wanted to ask any experienced knowledgable users what the
field order in the export box does if changing between progressive, upper or lower? I have read up on interlacing and de-interlacing as i noticed that my clip when played on the computer shows these horizontal interlacing lines when exported on the default 'upper' field order option and as a test I exported with 'progressive' and the lines had disappeared but I'm wondering if exporting it in progressive reduces the quality of the video in any way?
This video is to be played on an HD TV most likely for a meeting.
Reading up that some TVs will automatically de-interlace a clip, does this mean that
a) I should just leave it interlaced under 'upper' option and know that the horizontal lines won't appear on the TV? (still need to test this)
or
b) Just export as progressive as I am entirely wrong about the TV and the horizontal lines will show up on HD TVs unless I export with progressive?
I am pretty confused!
Please, I would appreciate any advice on this?
Sorry if i'm wrong on the things i've said, I am very new to all of this!
Thank you!

Hi Jess565,
Thanks for using Adobe forums,
You can go ahead and export as Progressive and it will not effect the quality of your video.
Happy Editing,
Sandeep

JPQL - No UPPER() in ORDER BY clause??

I have created a NamedQuery and am attempting to order my returned collection using the ORDER BY clause, however, the specification asks for string ordering to be case insensitive. It seems that I cannot do that with the Java Persistence Query Language - or at least the implementation that we are using. I am using Glassfish v2ur2 with uses Oracle TopLink Essentials - 2.0.1, Build b04-fcs (found in my Exception message).
I suspect that the only way to do what I want is to create a Comparator for the ResultList and run a sort after I get the result list from my EntityManager. Is that correct or is my syntax wrong in my JPQL?
Here is my named query (cut from a larger list of named queries), pretty simple:
@NamedQuery(name = "MyObject.findAll", query = "SELECT a FROM MyObject a ORDER BY UPPER(a.myString), a.Id")Here is a summary exception report that I receive:
===========================================================================
   Exception: javax.ejb.EJBException
   Description: nested exception is: java.rmi.ServerException: RemoteException occurred in server thread; nested exception is:
        java.rmi.RemoteException: null; nested exception is:
        Exception [TOPLINK-8024] (Oracle TopLink Essentials - 2.0.1 (Build b04-fcs (04/11/2008))): oracle.toplink.essentials.excepti
ons.EJBQLException
Exception Description: Syntax error parsing the query [MyObject.findAll: SELECT a FROM MyObject a WHERE ORDER BY UPPER(a.myString), a.Id], line 1, column 81: syntax error at [UPPER].
Internal Exception: line 1:81: expecting IDENT, found 'UPPER'
(Stack-Trace Included)
===========================================================================

Post Author: krypton
CA Forum: Data Connectivity and SQL
Thanks Lynn
I tried your suggestion. But there is one probelm.
When i sort the data in descending order using the count(calls) field, the data is returned but the customer's name appears multiple times along with their calls raised.
E.g, if customer Mark raised multiple calls i.e. 2, 5, and 10 calls, then the report will show
Mark   2
Mark 5
Mark 10
But is there a way to aggregate all the calls for mark and show them only once:
such as Mark   17
Thanks

Username - case sensitivity and embeded period

I have been asked to investigate the impact of syncing our oracle user names with our AD names .. which would mean putting a period (dot) in the username. (example - john.doe). First attempt to create one returned an error which lead to the following testing:
SQL> conn system/****
Connected.
SQL> --
SQL> -- create a user with a dot in the name
SQL> --
SQL> create user ed.stevens identified by tiger;
create user ed.stevens identified by tiger
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01936: cannot specify owner when creating users or rolesOk, the '.' is seen as a delimiter, so must be quoted, probably leading to case sensitivity.
SQL> create user "ed.stevens" identified by tiger;
User created.
SQL> grant create session to ed.stevens;
grant create session to ed.stevens
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00933: SQL command not properly ended
SQL> grant create session to "ed.stevens";
Grant succeeded.
SQL> select username
2    from dba_users
3    where upper(username) like 'ED%'
4    order by 1;
USERNAME
ed.stevens
1 row selected.Now let's do it with an upper case name
SQL> --
SQL> create user ED.STEVENS identified by lion;
create user ED.STEVENS identified by lion
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01936: cannot specify owner when creating users or roles
SQL> create user "ED.STEVENS" identified by lion;
User created.
SQL> grant create session to ED.STEVENS;
grant create session to ED.STEVENS
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00933: SQL command not properly ended
SQL> grant create session to "ED.STEVENS";
Grant succeeded.
SQL> select username
2    from dba_users
3    where upper(username) like 'ED%'
4    order by 1;
USERNAME
ED.STEVENS
ed.stevens
2 rows selected.Everything to here makes sense. Now lets' try to connect as these two nefarious characters!
SQL> --
SQL> conn ed.stevens/tiger
ERROR:
ORA-01017: invalid username/password; logon denied
Warning: You are no longer connected to ORACLE.
SQL> select user from dual;
SP2-0640: Not connected
SQL> conn "ed.stevens"/tiger
Connected.
SQL> select user from dual;
USER
ed.stevens
1 row selected.
SQL> --
SQL> conn ED.STEVENS/lion
Connected.Whaat?? Why wasn't the '.' seen as a delimiter here? This is the question that this example was leading to.
SQL> select user from dual;
USER
ED.STEVENS
1 row selected.
SQL> conn "ED.STEVENS"/lion
Connected.
SQL> select user from dual;
USER
ED.STEVENS
1 row selected.
SQL> --
SQL> spool off
SQL> conn system/****
Connected.
SQL> drop user "ed.stevens";
User dropped.
SQL> drop user "ED.STEVENS";
User dropped.

Centinul wrote:
Ed --
I saw different behavior in my environment:
SQL> CREATE USER "cen.tinul" IDENTIFIED BY mynx;
User created.
SQL> CREATE USER "CEN.TINUL" IDENTIFIED BY mynx;
User created.
SQL> GRANT CREATE SESSION TO "cen.tinul";
Grant succeeded.
SQL> GRANT CREATE SESSION TO "CEN.TINUL";
Grant succeeded.
SQL> SELECT * FROM V$VERSION;
BANNER
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bi
PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
CORE    10.2.0.4.0      Production
TNS for 64-bit Windows: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
SQL> CONNECT cen.tinul/mynx
Connected.
SQL> SHOW USER
USER is "CEN.TINUL"
SQL> CONNECT CEN.TINUL/mynx
Connected.
SQL> SHOW USER
USER is "CEN.TINUL"
"This just gets curioser and curioser."
This is the system I used for the test posted above - running on 32-bit OEL under vmware on my laptop
SQL> select * from v$version;
BANNER
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Prod
PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
CORE10.2.0.4.0Production
TNS for Linux: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
5 rows selected.So I ran the test against our prod datbase, running under 64-bit HP-UX Itanium
SQL> select * from v$version;
BANNER
Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 - 64bi
PL/SQL Release 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
CORE    10.2.0.4.0      Production
TNS for HPUX: Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
NLSRTL Version 10.2.0.4.0 - Production
5 rows selected.As for what about the two is not shown, the 32-bit Linux was built with the 10.2.0.1 base install, then the 10.2.0.4.0 patchset, then the Oct 2009 CPU - all before creating the database. The database was created from scripts using CREATE DATABASE, as generated originally by dbca (not the 'restore database' scripts from dbca when using one of their pre-defined templates.)
The HP-UX system was built as a 10.2.0.1 database, upgraded to 10.2.0.4, and has all CPU's through Jan 2010.
Both systems gave exactly the same results, which are obviously different from yours ....
A mystery wrapped in an enigma ....

Order of TOC indesign

Hi! I am having a trouble when creating a table of contents in my document. The order is not the right one. I know this happens because indesign is taking as a reference the order left to right... is there a way to change this order to upper side to bottom of the page?
thanks!
Lisbel

It's a real issue.
I don't know of any way to fix it. I thought the Articles panel could do it, but it doesn't.
However I did find an article on InDesignSecrets and explains a little more about this. It might give you a way to fix your problem. But if you've got a long book, it's may not help at this point.
http://indesignsecrets.com/fixing-toc-levels-that-refuse-to-behave.php

Trouble with order of select list values

Ok my list of values def is: 
 select distinct SOFTWARE d, 
SOFTWARE r 
from DBA_SW_INVENTORY 
 The problem is that values are displayed like so: 
A 
B 
C 
D 
b 
d 
I would like to see 
A 
B 
b 
C 
D 
d 

Order it by upper and it will fall in line.
select *
from (select 'A' col from dual union all
 select 'a' from dual union all
 select 'B' from dual union all
 select 'b' from dual union all
 select 'C' from dual union all
 select 'c' from dual union all
 select 'D' from dual)
order by upper(col)

Union Order by causing issue in SetWhereClause

Hi,
I am extending a CO and adding new query to the VO query.
I added where clause to the VO query. Also added Union. The Union is the same VO query with another where condition. VO query default had a Order by clause.
Now the total query looks like this.
select * from
(select a, b
from x, y) QRSLT
where ...
UNION
select * from
(select a, b
from x, y) QRSLT1
where ...
order by upper(a)
"Order by" is getting added since it is there in the original VO query.
Now I am getting the error as "java.sql.SQLException: ORA-01785: ORDER BY item must be the number of a SELECT-list expression"
The above query without the order by is working good. What is the best way to fix this?
Thanks,
HC

The problem is that you're using a UNION. The ORDER BY clause has to refer to a column in the query as a whole rather than just the second part of the UNION. In that situation, Oracle expects either a column position or the name of one of the selected columns.
Thanks
--Anil
http://oracleanil.blogspot.com/

Help on ORA-01785: ORDER BY item must be the number of a SELECT-list expres

Hi
Please find the SQL below . I am unable to place ORDER bY upper(column) due to error ORA-01785: ORDER BY item must be the number of a SELECT-list expression. Please help
SELECT engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id "hcp_id",
hcp.first_nm "first_nm", hcp.last_nm "last_nm",
FROM cnslt_engn, engn_tier_dtl, engn_cnslt_list, hcp
WHERE cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_engn_id
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id = hcp.hcp_id
AND engn_tier_dtl.cnslt_engn_id = cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id
AND engn_tier_dtl.engn_tier_dtl_id =
engn_cnslt_list.engn_tier_dtl_id
AND cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = 100643
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id NOT IN (
SELECT hcp_id
FROM mtg_cnslt_list
WHERE cnslt_mtg_id IN (SELECT cnslt_mtg_id
FROM cnslt_mtg
WHERE cnslt_engn_id = 1000643)
AND hcp_id IS NOT NULL)
UNION
SELECT mtg_cnslt_list.hcp_id "hcp_id", hcp.first_nm "first_nm",
hcp.last_nm "last_nm",
FROM cnslt_mtg,
cnslt_engn,
mtg_cnslt_list,
engn_tier_dtl,
engn_cnslt_list,
hcp
WHERE cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = cnslt_mtg.cnslt_engn_id
AND cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_engn_id
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id = mtg_cnslt_list.hcp_id
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id = hcp.hcp_id
AND cnslt_mtg.cnslt_mtg_id = mtg_cnslt_list.cnslt_mtg_id
AND engn_tier_dtl.cnslt_engn_id = cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id
AND mtg_cnslt_list.engn_tier_dtl_id =
engn_tier_dtl.engn_tier_dtl_id
AND cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = 1000643
order by upper(last_nm),upper(first_nm)

try:
select * from (SELECT engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id "hcp_id",
hcp.first_nm "first_nm", hcp.last_nm "last_nm",
FROM cnslt_engn, engn_tier_dtl, engn_cnslt_list, hcp
WHERE cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_engn_id
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id = hcp.hcp_id
AND engn_tier_dtl.cnslt_engn_id = cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id
AND engn_tier_dtl.engn_tier_dtl_id =
engn_cnslt_list.engn_tier_dtl_id
AND cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = 100643
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id NOT IN (
SELECT hcp_id
FROM mtg_cnslt_list
WHERE cnslt_mtg_id IN (SELECT cnslt_mtg_id
FROM cnslt_mtg
WHERE cnslt_engn_id = 1000643)
AND hcp_id IS NOT NULL)
UNION
SELECT mtg_cnslt_list.hcp_id "hcp_id", hcp.first_nm "first_nm",
hcp.last_nm "last_nm",
FROM cnslt_mtg,
cnslt_engn,
mtg_cnslt_list,
engn_tier_dtl,
engn_cnslt_list,
hcp
WHERE cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = cnslt_mtg.cnslt_engn_id
AND cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_engn_id
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id = mtg_cnslt_list.hcp_id
AND engn_cnslt_list.cnslt_hcp_id = hcp.hcp_id
AND cnslt_mtg.cnslt_mtg_id = mtg_cnslt_list.cnslt_mtg_id
AND engn_tier_dtl.cnslt_engn_id = cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id
AND mtg_cnslt_list.engn_tier_dtl_id =
engn_tier_dtl.engn_tier_dtl_id
AND cnslt_engn.cnslt_engn_id = 1000643
order by upper(last_nm),upper(first_nm)

Report dependant on portal username

i have been following the forums regarding the retrieval of usernames for reporting purposes.
i have created a view based on the WWCTX_API.get_user.
selecting from this is fine, and i returns my username to the page.....however if i run the following query
select dept.username
from matt_dept_user dept,
pot_merc_user_mmg mmg
where dept.username = mmg.username
matt_dept_user being the view which i have created and pot_merc_user_mmg being the referencing table.
when i run this, i get the following error...
Failed to parse query
Error: ORA-00918: column ambiguously defined (WWV-11230)
Failed to parse as MNUNN - select dept.username from matt_dept_user dept, pot_merc_user_mmg mmg where dept.username = mmg.username order by rowid (WWV-08300)
Error: Unable to execute query (WWV-10201)
Any ideas?????
Matt.

Matthew,
try this query instead
select dept.username
from matt_dept_user dept,
pot_merc_user_mmg mmg
where dept.username = mmg.username
order by dept.username
OR
select dept.username
from matt_dept_user dept,
pot_merc_user_mmg mmg
where dept.username = mmg.username
order by dept.rowid
==================================
NOTE: I have supplied an order by clause
at the end.
==================================
If it still fails then pls post it with error msg, version.
Thanx,
Chetan.

Order by clause performance

I have two tables table A (with 26 columns most of them varchar2) with 1.2 million records and table 2 with 30 records. I am doing a join and then ordering the result set. I have two set of queries one takes 164 seconds and the other 1.2 seconds.
I am not able to figure out why such a drastic difference when the only difference is in first case I do order by on a few columns and in the second case I do it on entire row.
TableA: firstname and lastname column are functional indexed (using upper)
Search by firstname 'JOHN%' returns back 37000+ records.
SLOW QUERY (takes 164 seconds):_
SELECT * FROM (
SELECT A.firstname, A.lastname, A.col4, A.col5......................A.col15
FROM tableA A, tableB B
WHERE A.col3 = B.col3 AND upper(A.FIRSTNAME) LIKE 'JOHN%'
ORDER BY uppeR(A.LASTNAME)
WHERE ROWNUM <251
FAST Query (takes 1.2s):_
SELECT A.firstname, A.lastname, A.col4, A.col5......................A.col15
FROM (
SELECT *
FROM tableA A
WHERE uppeR(A.FIRSTNAME) LIKE 'JOHN%'
ORDER BY upper(A.LASTNAME)
) A, tableB B
WHERE A.col3 = B.col3
and ROWNUM < 251

Hold your horses!
First of all:
Use the {noformat}{noformat} tags when posting code or execution plans etc, so formatting/indentation will be preserved and we'll be able to read/understand much faster.
( {noformat}..{noformat} - Displays everything between the tags as programming code )
Secondly, please read these informative threads:
When your query takes too long ...
HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
and after that, post all relevant details as pointed out by Rob and Randolf.

Dropped order question - windows, asp

Windows server, asp.
I built this cart and I occasionally get complaints from
customers that
their order was dropped. At first I suspected that they were
letting their
computer sit still too long and the session timed-out but it
seems as though
there's another problem.
I'm wondering if this is typical for a shopping cart.
Also, is there a good way to monitor this sort of activity?
The problem I am
having is duplicating the event that cased the cart to fail.
Because I can't
duplicate it, I can't fix it.
Any ideas welcome.

I setup my .PNGs with no interlacing however when I go to export if I leave the field order as upper it ruins my lower-thirds slightly. So the issue still remains.
If you enlarge these pictures you'll see that my progressive lower-thirds which are being exported from a 1080i upper field seqeunce get slightly jagged when leaving it as upper-field but if I select progressive when exporting from my upper field sequence then it looks fine but the problem with that is that it messes up my footage unless I use the Modify-Intertept option and change the footage to progressive that way. But that gets a bit old having to click each clip I have from our studio to change it's field order.
The other strange thing that I'm hoping that can be explained is that if I export to HD instead of exporting to SD it doesn't appear to hurt anything however if I export from my HD upper field sequence to SD upper field it screws up my progressive lower-thirds. It also messes them up even if I try using the interlaced lower-thirds I made initially.

Trouble with subquery and rownum and ordering

I'm having trouble making this subquery work. The basic idea is that the web app will show only so many rows of results on the page, but right now I'm just playing around in SQL*Plus. The address book holds mixed case, so in order to sort by name properly I need to use UPPER to ignore case sensitivity. This SQL statement works fine for me:
select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid like '905430931|%' order by upper(addressbookid);I know that if you mention ROWNUM in the WHERE clause, you're referring to the row numbers of the ResultSet that Oracle returns. How do I use both ORDER BY UPPER(ADDRESSBOOKID) and WHERE ROWNUM > 25 AND ROWNUM <= 50? I figured a subquery would do it, but I can't write a correct one that does it! Below are my 2 attempts with the errors, and then I just tried to play with rownum:
SQL> select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid in (select addressbookid from address book where addressbookid like '905430931|%' order by upper(addressbookid));
select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid in (select addressbookid from addressbook
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00907: missing right parenthesis
SQL> select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid in upper(select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid like '905430931|%');
select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid in upper(select addressbookid from address
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-00936: missing expression
SQL> select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid like '905430931|%' and rownum > 25 and rownum <= 50 order by upper(addressbookid);
no rows selected
SQL> select addressbookid from addressbook where addressbookid like '905430931|%' and rownum > 25 and rownum <= 50;
no rows selectedLike I said, if I can get a working subquery, then I'd like to attach that restriction on the rownum stuff. I'm wondering if it will be a problem trying to get the ordering to happen and then the rownum restriction after that, and all in the same query...
Btw, we've made all the table and column names in our database uppercase, so that shouldn't matter.

This is probably the most efficient way ...
select addressbookid
from
 select addressbookid,
 rownum rn
 from
 select addressbookid
 from addressbook
 where addressbookid like '905430931|%'
 order by addressbookid
 where rownum <= 50
where rn > 25

Emca Continually Shows "Invalid username/password" for the DBSNMP User

Hi,
During configure dbconsole DBSNMP user is giving invalid password whereas i am able to connect dbsnmp using sqlplus as below.
SQL> conn dbsnmp/dbsnmp@UAT
Connected.
while i m tryin to configure dbconsole got below error
emca -config dbcontrol db -repos create
$emca -config dbcontrol db -repos create
STARTED EMCA at May 29, 2010 4:29:31 PM
EM Configuration Assistant, Version 10.2.0.1.0 Production
Copyright (c) 2003, 2005, Oracle. All rights reserved.
Enter the following information:
Database SID: UAT
Listener port number: 1521
Password for SYS user:
Password for DBSNMP user:
Invalid username/password.
Password for DBSNMP user:
Invalid username/password.
Password for DBSNMP user:
Thanks

Hi,
Ok i will do in future.
I did as you said but issue is still coming.Now the error is bit different in the log file For this same error i found solution in meta doc id 337260.1 for exact error In the solution i have to to set the value as below but it has already same value.
Error:
CONFIG: SQLEngine created successfully and connected
May 29, 2010 5:03:06 PM oracle.sysman.emcp.DatabaseChecks validateUserCredential
CONFIG: Failed to update account status.
oracle.sysman.assistants.util.sqlEngine.SQLFatalErrorException: ORA-01034: ORACL
E not available
Solution:
In order to fix the Invalid username/password message
Check the profile limit for the users SYSMAN, DBSNMP and MGMT_VIEW
select u.username, u.profile, p.resource_name, p.limit
from dba_profiles p, dba_users u
where p.profile=u.profile
and u.username in ('SYS', 'SYSMAN','DBSNMP','MGMT_VIEW')
and p.resource_type = 'PASSWORD'
order by u.username, p.resource_name;
If the value of LIMIT for PASSWORD_VERIFY_FUNCTION is not NULL:
Change the password so that it meets the function requirements.
If the value of LIMIT for PASSWORD_REUSE_MAX is not UNLIMITED:
Change the password so that it is different from a password that has already been used the number of times set in PASSWORD_REUSE_MAX.
Or
Change the value of LIMIT for PASSWORD_REUSE_MAX to UNLIMITED for the profile.
Below output of 1st query:
USERNAME     PROFILE     RESOURCE_NAME     LIMIT
DBSNMP     DEFAULT     FAILED_LOGIN_ATTEMPTS     UNLIMITED
DBSNMP     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_GRACE_TIME     UNLIMITED
DBSNMP     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_LIFE_TIME     UNLIMITED
DBSNMP     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_LOCK_TIME     .0006
DBSNMP     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_REUSE_MAX     UNLIMITED
DBSNMP     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_REUSE_TIME     UNLIMITED
DBSNMP     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_VERIFY_FUNCTION     NULL
SYS     DEFAULT     FAILED_LOGIN_ATTEMPTS     UNLIMITED
SYS     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_GRACE_TIME     UNLIMITED
SYS     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_LIFE_TIME     UNLIMITED
SYS     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_LOCK_TIME     .0006
SYS     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_REUSE_MAX     UNLIMITED
SYS     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_REUSE_TIME     UNLIMITED
SYS     DEFAULT     PASSWORD_VERIFY_FUNCTION     NULL
Thanks

Oracle: strange ORDER BY result

We're loading some data with a select clause from an oracle 8.1.7 and sorting the data by adding an "ORDER BY F_NAME" to the query.
On our development app server this runs fine and returns the expected result, but on out test app server the order depends on the case of the field F_NAME. It returns big caps before small caps (i.e. Armani, Miller, aman, meyer).
Does anyone know what to do in this case? I can replace it with an ORDER BY UPPER(F_NAME) of course, but this behaviour is just so strange that I fail to accept that as a valid workaround.

Interesting. The only points I'd add are:
1) I presume you're connecting to two different schemas (users) on the same database. I wonder if its possible to affect these settings for specific users?
2) Do you use the OCI or thin driver? (Or different driver on each platform?). OCI uses Oracle client functionality, so its possible it might be picking up environmental settings that alter its behavior.
3) You can also alter behavior of things like this for a single connection (with "alter session" SQL); assuming no-one has done this explicitly with a SQL statement it would seem unlikely that the app server is doing it when creating connections in the pool.
Seems like you need to consult with someone with specific expertise in these areas of Oracle.
T

Order by upper(username)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for