Simple Query working on 10G and not working on 11gR2 after upgrade

Question

Hi Folks,
This is the first time i am posting the query in this Blog.
I have a small issue which preventing the UAT Sigoff.
Simple query working fine on 10.2.0.1 and after upgrade to 11.2.0.1 its error out
10.2.0.4:
=====
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1=1;
COUNT(*)
1
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1=00001;
COUNT(*)
1
SQL> select ATTRIBUTE1 FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1=1;
ATTRIBUTE1
00001
11.2.0.1:
=====
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1=1
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01722: invalid number
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1=00001
ERROR at line 1:
ORA-01722: invalid number
SQL> select ATTRIBUTE1 FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1='1';
no rows selected
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*) FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1='00001';
COUNT(*)
1
SQL> select ATTRIBUTE1 FROM APPS.HZ_PARTIES HP WHERE ATTRIBUTE_CATEGORY= 'PROPERTY' AND ATTRIBUTE1='00001';
ATTRIBUTE1
00001
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SQL > desc APPS.HZ_PARTIES
Name Type
======== ======
ATTRIBUTE1 VARCHAR2(150)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Changes:
Recently i upgraded the DB from 10.2.0.4 to 11.2.0.1
Query:
1.If the type of that row is VARCHAR,why it is working in 10.2.0.4 and why not working in 11.2.0.1
2.after upgrade i analyzed the table with "analyze table " query for all AP,AR,GL,HR,BEN,APPS Schemas--Is it got impact if we run analyze table.
Please provide me the answer for above two questions or refer the document is also well enough to understand.Based on the Answer client will sigoff to-day.
Thanks,
P Kumar

Answer 1

WhiteHat wrote:
the issue has already been identified: in oracle versions prior to 11, there was an implicit conversion of numbers to characters. your database has a character field which you are attempting to compare to a number.
i.e. the string '000001' is not in any way equivalent to the number 1. but Oracle 10 converts '000001' to a number because you are asking it to compare to the number you have provided.
version 11 doesn't do this anymore (and rightly so).
the issue is with the bad code design. you can either: use characters in the predicate (where field = 'parameter') or you can do a conversion of the field prior to comparing (where to_num(field) = parameter).
I would suggest that you should fix your code and don't assume that '000001' = 1I don't think that the above is completely correct, and a simple demonstration will show why. First, a simple table on Oracle Database 10.2.0.4:
CREATE TABLE T1(C1 VARCHAR2(20));
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('1');
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('0001');
COMMIT;A select from the above table, relying on implicit data type conversion:
SELECT
FROM
  T1
WHERE
  C1=1;
C1
1
0001Technically, the second row should not have been returned as an exact match. Why was it returned, let's take a look at the actual execution plan:
SELECT
FROM
  TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY_CURSOR(NULL,NULL,NULL));
SQL_ID  g6gvbpsgj1dvf, child number 0
SELECT   * FROM   T1 WHERE   C1=1
Plan hash value: 3617692013
| Id  | Operation         | Name | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |      |       |       |     2 (100)|          |
|*  1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| T1   |     2 |    24 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   1 - filter(TO_NUMBER("C1")=1)
Note
   - dynamic sampling used for this statementNotice that the VARCHAR2 column was converted to a NUMBER, so if there was any data in that column that could not be converted to a number (or NULL), we should receive an error (unless the bad rows are already removed due to another predicate in the WHERE clause). For example:
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('.0001.');
SELECT
FROM
  T1
WHERE
  C1=1;
SQL> SELECT
  2    *
  3  FROM
  4    T1
  5  WHERE
  6    C1=1;
ERROR:
ORA-01722: invalid numberNow the same test on Oracle Database 11.1.0.7:
CREATE TABLE T1(C1 VARCHAR2(20));
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('1');
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('0001');
COMMIT;
SELECT
FROM
  T1
WHERE
  C1=1;
C1
1
0001
SELECT
FROM
  TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY_CURSOR(NULL,NULL,NULL));
SQL_ID  g6gvbpsgj1dvf, child number 0
SELECT   * FROM   T1 WHERE   C1=1
Plan hash value: 3617692013
| Id  | Operation         | Name | Rows  | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT  |      |       |       |     2 (100)|          |
|*  1 |  TABLE ACCESS FULL| T1   |     2 |    24 |     2   (0)| 00:00:01 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   1 - filter(TO_NUMBER("C1")=1)
Note
   - dynamic sampling used for this statement
INSERT INTO T1 VALUES ('.0001.');
SELECT
FROM
  T1
WHERE
  C1=1;
SQL> SELECT
  2    *
  3  FROM
  4    T1
  5  WHERE
  6    C1=1;
ERROR:
ORA-01722: invalid numberAs you can see, exactly the same actual execution plan, and the same end result.
The OP needs to determine if non-numeric data now exists in the column. Was the database characterset possibly changed during/after the upgrade?
Charles Hooper
Co-author of "Expert Oracle Practices: Oracle Database Administration from the Oak Table"
http://hoopercharles.wordpress.com/
IT Manager/Oracle DBA
K&M Machine-Fabricating, Inc.