Strange Query

Hi all,
I've got a problem with the following query: if I include a filter on a table, the explain plan say me that there's a cartesian. If I avoid the filter, no.
The database version is 10.2.0.4.
In another Environment (same DB, same OS, same etc...) there are no problems!
Here the query and the explain plan:
query without filter:
SELECT DISTINCT
       E.ID_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED
     , E.START_VALIDITY_DATE
     , E.START_ASINC_DATE
     , E.CUSTOMER_STATUS
     , Z.FLAG_PASSIVE_SWITCH
FROM TW_E_SUPPLY_A Z
   , TW_E_SUPPLY_H B
   , TW_E_CUST_UNI_CUST Y
   , TW_T_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED_A E
WHERE Z.ID_SUPPLY = B.ID_SUPPLY
AND Z.END_VALIDITY_DATE IS NULL
AND B.END_VALIDITY_DATE IS NULL
AND B.ID_CUSTOMER = Y.ID_CUSTOMER
AND Y.END_LINK_DATE IS NULL
AND Y.ID_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED = E.ID_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED
AND Y.START_VALIDITY_DATE = E.START_VALIDITY_DATE
-- AND E.CUSTOMER_STATUS = 'NON ATTIVO'
AND Z.FLAG_PASSIVE_SWITCH = 'Y';explain plan without filter:
| Id | Operation                  | Name                    | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Pstart| Pstop |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT           |                         | 5152 |   477K|       | 2570   (2)|       |       |
|   1 | HASH UNIQUE               |                         | 5152 |   477K| 1112K| 2570   (2)|       |       |
|   2 |   HASH JOIN                |                         | 5152 |   477K|       | 2453   (2)|       |       |
|   3 |    HASH JOIN               |                         | 5455 |   351K|       | 1923   (2)|       |       |
|   4 |     HASH JOIN              |                         | 5455 |   175K|       | 1365   (2)|       |       |
|   5 |      PARTITION RANGE SINGLE|                         | 5455 | 70915 |       |   309   (2)|    22 |    22 |
|   6 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL    | TW_E_SUPPLY_A           | 5455 | 70915 |       |   309   (2)|    22 |    22 |
|   7 |      PARTITION RANGE SINGLE|                         |   162K| 3179K|       | 1054   (1)|    22 |    22 |
|   8 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL    | TW_E_SUPPLY_H           |   162K| 3179K|       | 1054   (1)|    22 |    22 |
|   9 |     PARTITION RANGE SINGLE |                         |   327K|    10M|       |   556   (1)|    22 |    22 |
| 10 |      TABLE ACCESS FULL     | TW_E_CUST_UNI_CUST      |   327K|    10M|       |   556   (1)|    22 |    22 |
| 11 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL       | TW_T_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED_A |   311K| 8811K|       |   529   (1)|       |       |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                                                                                                                                                                          query with filter:
SELECT DISTINCT
       E.ID_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED
     , E.START_VALIDITY_DATE
     , E.START_ASINC_DATE
     , E.CUSTOMER_STATUS
     , Z.FLAG_PASSIVE_SWITCH
FROM TW_E_SUPPLY_A Z
   , TW_E_SUPPLY_H B
   , TW_E_CUST_UNI_CUST Y
   , TW_T_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED_A E
WHERE Z.ID_SUPPLY = B.ID_SUPPLY
AND Z.END_VALIDITY_DATE IS NULL
AND B.END_VALIDITY_DATE IS NULL
AND B.ID_CUSTOMER = Y.ID_CUSTOMER
AND Y.END_LINK_DATE IS NULL
AND Y.ID_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED = E.ID_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED
AND Y.START_VALIDITY_DATE = E.START_VALIDITY_DATE
AND E.CUSTOMER_STATUS = 'NON ATTIVO'
AND Z.FLAG_PASSIVE_SWITCH = 'Y';explain plan with filter:
| Id | Operation                           | Name                    | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Pstart| Pstop |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT                    |                         |     1 |    95 | 1401   (2)|       |       |
|   1 | HASH UNIQUE                        |                         |     1 |    95 | 1401   (2)|       |       |
|   2 |   TABLE ACCESS BY GLOBAL INDEX ROWID| TW_E_SUPPLY_H           |     1 |    20 |     3   (0)|    22 |    22 |
|   3 |    NESTED LOOPS                     |                         |     1 |    95 | 1400   (2)|       |       |
|   4 |     HASH JOIN                       |                         |     1 |    75 | 1397   (2)|       |       |
|   5 |      MERGE JOIN CARTESIAN           |                         |     1 |    42 |   838   (2)|       |       |
|   6 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL             | TW_T_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED_A |     1 |    29 |   529   (1)|       |       |
|   7 |       BUFFER SORT                   |                         | 5455 | 70915 |   309   (2)|       |       |
|   8 |        PARTITION RANGE SINGLE       |                         | 5455 | 70915 |   309   (2)|    22 |    22 |
|   9 |         TABLE ACCESS FULL           | TW_E_SUPPLY_A           | 5455 | 70915 |   309   (2)|    22 |    22 |
| 10 |      PARTITION RANGE SINGLE         |                         |   327K|    10M|   556   (1)|    22 |    22 |
| 11 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL             | TW_E_CUST_UNI_CUST      |   327K|    10M|   556   (1)|    22 |    22 |
| 12 |     INDEX RANGE SCAN                | TW_E_SUPPLY_H_CUST_IDX |     2 |       |     2   (0)|       |       |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                                                                                                                                                                         Someone know what can cause this?
Thanks in advance
Steve

In general, this is not necessarily something to be worried about.
In general, if that estimate of one row from TW_T_CUSTOMER_UNIFIED_A is inaccurate, then you've most likely got a statistics issue.
However, is that one row estimate accurate?
If not, firstly can you post the predicates sections of this plan?
Then can you also run the query (run it not explain it) with the /*+ gather_plan_statistics */ hint and immediately afterwardsoutput from
SELECT * FROM TABLE(DBMS_XPLAN.DISPLAY_CURSOR(null,null,'ALLSTATS LAST');

Similar Messages

A strange query of queries bug in CF11?

Hi,
I have this strange query of queries result that could be a bug in CF11. The result is fine in CF10.
Basically, I have 2 queries, qrA and qrB. I do a join of the two in joinQr, after which I do a query of qrA. Since I didn't alter qrA in any way, I would expect newQrA to give me the same result as qrA. However it only gives me one row ("D"). Now, here's the strange thing: If I start off qrA with the letters in ascending order ["A", "B", "C", "D"], then newQrA gives me the right result.
<cfset qrA = queryNew("")>
<cfset queryAddColumn( qrA, "size", "varchar", [ "D", "A", "B", "C" ] )>
<cfset qrB = queryNew("")>
<cfset queryAddColumn( qrB, "size", "varchar", [ "A" ] )>
<cfset queryAddColumn( qrB, "quantity", "integer", [ 0 ] )>
<cfquery name="joinQr" dbtype="query">
    select qrA.*, qrB.quantity
    from qrA, qrB
    where qrA.size = qrB.size
</cfquery>
<cfquery name="newQrA" dbtype="query">
    select *
    from qrA
</cfquery>
<cfdump var="#qrA#">
<cfdump var="#qrB#">
<cfdump var="#joinQr#">
<cfdump var="#newQrA#">

For your interest, by coincidence, my first test was with
<cfset queryAddColumn( qrA, "size", "varchar", [ "A","B","C","D" ] )>
It turns out that the order "A","B","C","D" works, whereas "D","A","B","C" fails. Quite funny, really.

Strange query / explain plan

(I posted this in the Oracle Text forum, but I think it's as appropriate here.)
Consider the following queries:
:the_filter := 'FILE';
(1)
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM FOO
WHERE CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
(2)
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM FOO
WHERE 'FILE' IS NULL OR CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
(3)
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM FOO
WHERE :the_filter IS NULL OR CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
(1) and (2) use the text index and run normally, but (3) does a full table scan, but I don't understand why.
The reason behind my using a query of the form (3) is to say 'keep the record if the filter is null or the record contains the filter'. I'm using the filter as a switch, and (3) is actually a simplified form of a complex query with several tables and filters. How can I do this without the query using a full table scan?
Below is the script and a record of the full session:
SET ECHO ON;
SET TIMING ON;
DROP TABLE FOO;
CREATE TABLE FOO (search_col VARCHAR2(100));
-- Loads of dummy data
INSERT INTO FOO (search_col) SELECT OBJECT_NAME || ' ' || OBJECT_TYPE
FROM ALL_OBJECTS WHERE ROWNUM <= 20000;
COMMIT;
CREATE INDEX I1 ON FOO(search_col) INDEXTYPE IS CTXSYS.CONTEXT
PARAMETERS(' section group ctxsys.html_section_group');
variable the_filter varchar2(100);
begin
:the_filter := 'FILE';
end;
SET AUTOTRACE ON EXPLAIN;
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM FOO
WHERE CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM FOO
WHERE 'FILE' IS NULL OR CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
SELECT COUNT(*)
FROM FOO
WHERE :the_filter IS NULL OR CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
Connected to:
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.6.0 - Production
With the Partitioning, Oracle Label Security, OLAP and Oracle Data Mining options
JServer Release 9.2.0.6.0 - Production
SQL*Plus: Release 10.2.0.1.0 - Production on Tue Nov 21 11:21:22 2006
Copyright (c) 1982, 2005, Oracle. All rights reserved.
Connected to:
Oracle9i Enterprise Edition Release 9.2.0.6.0 - Production
With the Partitioning, Oracle Label Security, OLAP and Oracle Data Mining options
JServer Release 9.2.0.6.0 - Production
SQL> SET TIMING ON;
SQL> DROP TABLE FOO;
Table dropped.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.73
SQL> CREATE TABLE FOO (search_col VARCHAR2(100));
Table created.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.03
SQL> -- Loads of dummy data
SQL> INSERT INTO FOO (search_col) SELECT OBJECT_NAME || ' ' || OBJECT_TYPE
2 FROM ALL_OBJECTS WHERE ROWNUM <= 20000;
20000 rows created.
Elapsed: 00:00:01.92
SQL> COMMIT;
Commit complete.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
SQL> CREATE INDEX I1 ON FOO(search_col) INDEXTYPE IS CTXSYS.CONTEXT
2 PARAMETERS(' section group ctxsys.html_section_group');
Index created.
Elapsed: 00:00:10.76
SQL> variable the_filter varchar2(100);
SQL> begin
2 :the_filter := 'FILE';
3 end;
4 /
PL/SQL procedure successfully completed.
Elapsed: 00:00:00.00
SQL> SET AUTOTRACE ON EXPLAIN;
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*)
2 FROM FOO
3 WHERE CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
COUNT(*)
29
Elapsed: 00:00:00.07
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=59)
1 0 SORT (AGGREGATE)
2 1 DOMAIN INDEX OF 'I1' (Cost=0 Card=1 Bytes=59)
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*)
2 FROM FOO
3 WHERE 'FILE' IS NULL OR CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
COUNT(*)
29
Elapsed: 00:00:00.08
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=59)
1 0 SORT (AGGREGATE)
2 1 DOMAIN INDEX OF 'I1' (Cost=0 Card=1 Bytes=59)
SQL> SELECT COUNT(*)
2 FROM FOO
3 WHERE :the_filter IS NULL OR CONTAINS(search_col,:the_filter) > 0;
COUNT(*)
29
Elapsed: 00:00:04.06
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=CHOOSE (Cost=34482 Card=1 Bytes=5
9)
1 0 SORT (AGGREGATE)
2 1 TABLE ACCESS (FULL) OF 'FOO' (Cost=34482 Card=453 Bytes=
26727)

Nothing is really strange when you are attempting to integrate with legacy systems! =)
If no numerical processing is done why should numerical values be stored as numbers?

Oracle taking a strange query execution path

I have a query which is admittedly a bit unconventional but Oracle is really doing something strange with it...
SELECT   GROUP_CODE, STATUS, COL3, COL4, ETC...
FROM MAIN_TABLE A
WHERE A.STATUS = 'COMPLETE' -- ONLY GET COMPLETE RECORDS...
    -- AND ONLY FOR THOSE WHERE THERE ARE NO INCOMPLETE RECORDS IN THE SAME GROUP
    AND (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM MAIN_TABLE B WHERE B.GROUP_CODE = A.GROUP_CODE AND B.STATUS != 'COMPLETE') = 0
ORDER BY GROUP_CODE
[\CODE]
This query is done on a table of ~100k records, and the result should only return about 100 or so records.
The only index in the table is on GROUP_CODE, and statistics are up-to-date.
The strange part is that the query takes over an hour to complete, UNLESS I take out the ORDER BY, then it takes only a few seconds!!! The difference is that with the ORDER BY, it is using the GROUP_CODE index (even with a */*+ NO_INDEX(MAIN_TABLE) */* hint in the query).
How can I either reorganize this query or prevent Oracle from taking the "incorrect" path?
Edited by: xaeryan on May 20, 2011 3:01 PM
Edited by: xaeryan on May 20, 2011 3:02 PM

try something as below..
select *
from
     select GROUP_CODE, STATUS, COL3, COL4, ETC...,
     max(case when STATUS != 'COMPLETE' then 1 ELSE 0 END) over( partition by GROUP_CODE) as mx
     from
     MAIN_TABLE
)X
where mx= 0 HTH...

APEX Views - Strange query results

One of my customers is running 3.1.2 version of APEX on a 10g database. I had two problems with it today:
1. I implemented IBM Webseal SSO there and suddenly none of the authorisation schemes were running. Why, I don't know. I had to delete and recreate them.
2. To be sure I replaced all the old authorization schemes I had to query the apex views. Searching on the non public pages with authorization I noticed some strange results. I run this query
SELECT page_id
FROM apex_application_pages
WHERE page_requires_authentication = 'No' AND application_id = 200and in the result set I received a lot of pages where "Page requires Authentication" was set. I checked and indeed the results were wrong. After that I picked one of the pages from the result set and I set it to "Page is public". After running the same query the page id was not in the result set anymore.
Has anyone seen this before?
Denes Kubicek
http://deneskubicek.blogspot.com/
http://www.opal-consulting.de/training
http://apex.oracle.com/pls/otn/f?p=31517:1
-------------------------------------------------------------------

missing records after query when using a radiogroup are normally caused by an unappropiate setting of the property "Mapping of other values" at the record group. Check your setting for that value.

Query Profile Option - Strange Query Result

Hello,
I'm having a strange situation working with the profile option.
I have the responsibility MY_RESP associated to the profile option "MY_PROFILE" that is set to the value "Company Business Group Europe".
Now If I check using the OA which is profile option value associated to the profile option MY_PROFILE I get the right value "Company Business Group Europe".
If I run a query to check the same thing insted to get the value "Company Business Group Europe" I get a strange number.
Now I'm having this problem with several profile option values and that's not good 'cause I absolutly need to copy some hundreds of responsibilties with profile options, from an environment to another one and if I cannot get this values using the query it seems enough crazy to get them one by one using the application.
Do you have an idea about how to resolve this problem?
The query I was running to see the profile option values set for each profile option of each responsibilty was the following:
SELECT distinct
d.responsibility_name user_or_responsibility_name,
g.user_profile_option_name,
b.profile_option_value,
a.start_date_active,
a.end_date_active,
a.profile_option_name
FROM
applsys.fnd_profile_option_values b,
applsys.fnd_profile_options a,
applsys.fnd_responsibility_tl d,
FND_PROFILE_OPTIONS_VL g
WHERE
b.profile_option_id = a.profile_option_id
and g.profile_option_id = a.profile_option_id
and b.level_id = 10003
and b.level_value = d.responsibility_id
and d.responsibility_name like '%_ES'
ORDER BY
d.responsibility_name;
morover if I run the query
select PROFILE_OPTION_VALUE
from fnd_profile_option_values
where PROFILE_OPTION_VALUE = 'Company Business Group Europe'
the result is empty...
Thank you for the tips.
BR
DV

can any one please help me that i have a requirement based on the profile option name get all the available values which are present for each level i tried the so many queries but for each profile option name it getting the id not the value please provide me a query for this issueThere are many docs available, and if you search the forum you could simply find it -- profile option pointing to old sid
Thanks,
Hussein

Strange query behavior when displayed in browser.

Hi gurus,
when I open a query in browser on one of the computers, I get no detailed cells, just the overall result.
No matter, if I open the query in Portal, or in BEx Web Analyzer.
When I use BEx Analyzer, everything seems to be fine.
When I open the same query, on the same user, but on another computer, queries are displayed properly.
Do you know what might cause the problem? Maybe some browser settings?
Regards,
Dorota

Thanks, we recently installed a new GUI version on this computer, so probably you're right

Strange query from JDBC Thin Client on all_arguments

Hi,
in my statspack report I can see that query
SELECT   package_name AS procedure_cat, owner AS procedure_schem,
         object_name AS procedure_name, argument_name AS column_name,
         DECODE (POSITION,
                 0, 5,
                 DECODE (in_out, 'IN', 1, 'OUT', 4, 'IN/OUT', 2, 0)
                ) AS column_type,
         DECODE (data_type,
                 'CHAR', 1,
                 'VARCHAR2', 12,
                 'NUMBER', 3,
                 'LONG', -1,
                 'DATE', 93,
                 'RAW', -3,
                 'LONG RAW', -4,
                 'TIMESTAMP', 93,
                 'TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE', -101,
                 'TIMESTAMP WITH LOCAL TIME ZONE', -102,
                 'INTERVAL YEAR TO MONTH', -103,
                 'INTERVAL DAY TO SECOND', -104,
                 'BINARY_FLOAT', 100,
                 'BINARY_DOUBLE', 101,
                 1111
                ) AS data_type,
         DECODE (data_type,
                 'OBJECT', type_owner || '.' || type_name,
                 data_type
                ) AS type_name,
         DECODE (data_precision,
                 NULL, data_length,
                 data_precision
                ) AS PRECISION,
         data_length AS LENGTH, data_scale AS scale, 10 AS radix,
         1 AS nullable, NULL AS remarks, SEQUENCE, overload, DEFAULT_VALUE
    FROM all_arguments
   WHERE owner LIKE :1 ESCAPE '/'
     AND object_name LIKE :2 ESCAPE '/'
     AND data_level = 0
     AND package_name LIKE :3 ESCAPE '/'
     AND (   argument_name LIKE :5 ESCAPE '/'
          OR (argument_name IS NULL AND data_type IS NOT NULL)
ORDER BY procedure_schem, procedure_name, overload, SEQUENCE
/its executed 7000 per day and its top logical i/o consuming .
Whats the functionality behind that ?
How can I speak with developers to get rid of that :) ?
DB is 9.2.0.8
Regards
GregG

Whats the functionality behind that ? A quick search over the Internet shows that it seems related to this Java class :
oracle.jdbc.OracleDatabaseMetaData.getProcedureColumns

Another strange query

hi,
the call:
patient = (PPatient)pm.getObjectById(patientId, true);
yields to the following sql statement:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM PPATIENT, PPATIENT t0 WHERE t0.OID = ?
this is a dramatically performance problem for us.
the patientId is an id returned by
pm.getObjectId(patient);
then
commit;
and then getObjectById
the above call behaves the same with or with or without an active
transaction!
thanks in advance
matthias.stephan

Matthias & Tibor-
Good catch. You are right: the SQL we are issuing is sub-optimal. I've
made a bug report for this at:
http://bugzilla.solarmetric.com/show_bug.cgi?id=613
You can expect it to be fixed in the near future.
In article <[email protected]>, Tibor Varga wrote:
Hi,
This is something I was also pondering about. Can you explain why the
query performed by Kodo is faster than this one:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM PPATIENT t0 WHERE t0.OID = ?
This one does not count the number of rows in the given table, it either
gives you 1 or 0, depending on the existence of the sought record.
I feel I'm missing something tricky here. Thank you,
Tibor
Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
Matthias,
Passing the "true" argument to PersistenceManager.getObjectById
indicates that the JDO system must verify that the object exists in the
datastore. Thus, Kodo is performing the validation in as fast a way as
it can.
If you do not want datastore-side validation, and instead just want to
grab the object from the cache, then pass "false" as the second
argument.
See also:
http://www.solarmetric.com/javadoc/jdo/javax/jdo/PersistenceManager.html#getObjectById(java.lang.Object,%20boolean)
In article <b59hmm$dai$[email protected]>, Matthias Stephan wrote:
hi,
the call:
patient = (PPatient)pm.getObjectById(patientId, true);
yields to the following sql statement:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM PPATIENT, PPATIENT t0 WHERE t0.OID = ?
this is a dramatically performance problem for us.
the patientId is an id returned by
pm.getObjectId(patient);
then
commit;
and then getObjectById
the above call behaves the same with or with or without an active
transaction!
thanks in advance
matthias.stephan
Marc Prud'hommeaux [email protected]
SolarMetric Inc. http://www.solarmetric.com

Strange query behaviour

I have a simple select query having a like statement as
select * from table where name like %sami%
This query behaves differently when run in the MS Access DB and when run from the Java code.
when i remove the LIKE stmt then its behabiour is normal but when i use LIKE (sometimes with % and sometimes with *) the query does not return anything from the Java code.
it works fine within Access DB
whats the problem?
Thanks

try this
'_sami_'
or
without ' '
sami
i don't know exactly....
just try it out

Strange query plans, and so different results from a view.

In my database (11g), I have a currency exchange rate table, which contains all currencies and their exchange rate to USD. I need to have a number of different exchange rates - To GBP, EUR, etc...
To accomplish this I have created a view, which has one union statement of all the USD exchange rates, with the same data joined back on itself to give the exchange rates based on their exchange rate to USD - ie: SELECT b1.Date, b1.Currency AS FromCurrency, b2.Currency as ToCurrency, b1.Rate/b2.Rate as Exchange Rate FROM Rates b1, Rates b2 on b1.Date = b2.Date
This view works fine when I query it, and returns the data as I expect.
I have a second view that is joined to this view to give a return of the amount in each currency for reporting. This view seems to work correctly when I narrow down the search requirements and have a small set of data.
The issue I am having is when I query the second view and get it to return all the data. Instead of receiving 4 rows per transaction (I am only interested in 4 exchange rates for display) I typically receive up to 2 rows. The first record is for the conversion to USD, the second record is for the conversion to the supplied currency. The issue is that this exchange rate actually includes the aggregate for all 3 other requested currencies (not the USD).
So instead of getting something like:
Amt RC BC (Amt = Amount, RC = Reporting Currency. BC = Base Currency)
60 GBP GBP
80 EUR GBP
100 USD GBP
1000 ZAR GBP
60 GBP USD
80 EUR USD
100 USD USD
1000 ZAR USD
I get the following set of results:
1140 GBP GBP
100 USD GBP
100 USD USD
Has anyone come accross something similar or have any ideas on how I can resolve this?
Thanks
PS: I can get both sets of results from the same view depending on the filter criteria. Also if I convert the exchange rates into a table, it then returns the correct results as expected.

943081 wrote:
The idea is to seek help in solving the problem. I was hoping that perhaps someone had experienced the same thing - different results for "effectively" the same query:Well, that's the issue... without additional info, it's not clear what issue you were seeing.
SELECT * FROM view WHERE Date = '01 January, 2012'
verse
SELECT * FROM view WHERE Date > '31 December, 2011' ORDER BY DateNow it's a bit clearer. That second query is not "effectively" the same as the first query. If the date column is in DATE format, then you ought to have a to_date() around the date string to explicitly convert it into a date so you can do date-to-date comparisons correctly. Also, DATE datatype stores times as well as dates, so asking for data matching midnight of a specific date is different than asking for data greater than midnight of the previous day.
If the date string is a string, then ... well, the string "31 December 2011" is greater than the string "31 August 2013", despite it being an earlier date. This is why making sure you're using the right datatype for the job is important - a date is different to a string that just happens to contain a date.
DateID
I have no objection to using a Date but always struggle to understand what someone means when they tell me "06/07/2012" - granted if the day is above 12 or the same day and month I don't have a problem - but it still leaves 121 days a year that are confusing. sure, but just because you find outputting the display (or rather, someone else's output) confusing doesn't mean you still shouldn't use the correct datatype. Store things as a date, and you can then output it in whatever format you like. Try doing that with a string or a number.
Don't say it doesn't happen as I got a birthday card from a company in May this year when I have specifically entered my date of birth as being the 5 of a month (name drop down box on their website)!Just because someone else doesn't understand how to work with dates correctly doesn't mean you can't! It's not exactly rocket science, after all!*{;-)

Grouping Inner Query based on a column.Please help

I have a strange query.
I am using Subquery to display the count of rows from the inner query
depending upon the value of 'Y' or 'N'
Trade
id_entity       id_inst_code_type   id_inst_code   dt_trade
AGL            SE                  5660249        10-Feb-06
AGL            SE                  5660249        13-Feb-06
AGL            SE                  5660249        13-Feb'06
Instrument_xref
ID_inst      id_inst_xref_type     id_inst_xref flg_active
0029010             SE          5660249          Y
0070789          SE          5660249          Y
0071190          SE          5660249          Y
0072385          SE          5660249          Y
0073215          SE          5660249          Y
0084797          SE          5660249          Y
0091375          SE          5660249          Y
0094690          SE          5660249          Y
0104438          SE          5660249          Y
My output:
id_inst_code_type          id_inst_code   Earliest    Latest       Total    Active
SE                         5660249       10 Feb 06   13 Feb 06    3        9
2) If all the 'flg_active' column in Table Instrument_xref is set to 'N'
   the Active should be 0.
3) Assume that the flg_active could be 3 Y's and 6 N's then what?
id_inst_code_type          id_inst_code   Earliest    Latest       Total    Active
SE                         5660249       10 Feb 06   13 Feb 06    3        0
How do I check for the 'Y' or 'N' value in my code below ?
Help appreciated as the the functionality changes by the hour...
select    tie.id_entity             'Entity',
          tie.id_inst_code          'Inst Code',
          min(tie.dt_trade)         'Earliest',
          max(tie.dt_trade)         'Latest',
          count(*)                  'Total',
          dt.InnerTotal             'Active'
from     trade_input_event tie,
(Select insx.id_inst_xref_type,
               insx.id_inst_xref,
               insx.flg_active,
               count(*) InnerTotal
from instrument_xref insx
where insx.id_inst_xref = '5660249'
---** Do I need to Check the flg_active here..
---** Do I need to use the Having clause here? ie having count(insx.id_inst_xref) = 'N'
   group by insx.id_inst_xref_type,insx.id_inst_xref,insx.flg_active) dt
where tie.id_inst_code = dt.id_inst_xref
and tie.id_entity = 'AGL'
group by tie.id_entity, tie.id_inst_code_type,tie.id_inst_code

As the flg_active is set to 'Y', I am trying to set it to 'N' in the query
so that count of 0 is returned, but this displays nothing.
Please help as to how to display a count(*) of 0 when the flg_active is 'N'??
Select insx.id_inst_xref_type,
               insx.id_inst_xref,
               insx.flg_active,
               count(*) InnerTotal
from instrument_xref insx
where insx.id_inst_xref = '5660249'
and insx.flg_active = 'N'
group by insx.id_inst_xref_type,insx.id_inst_xref,insx.flg_active) dt

Query to retrieve rows from database

hi ,
I have a strange query " My oracle database contains around 4000 records. As it is not advisable to retrieve all the rows at the time. Is it possible for me to retrieve the rows 100 in a page and then the next hundred and then the next....... Not sure whether we can write a PL/SQL command for this or we need to tweak the database to show such options. Can anyone suggest on this please ????

Hi,
That's called a Pagination Query , and here's one way to do it:
WITH     got_r_num     AS
     SELECT     x.*     -- or whatever columns you need
     ,     ROW_NUMBER () OVER (ORDER BY u_key)     AS r_num
     FROM     table_x
--     WHERE     ...     -- If you need any filtering, put it here
SELECT       *     -- or list all columns except r_num
FROM       got_r_num
WHERE       TRUNC (r_num / 100)     = :page_number
ORDER BY r_num
;U_key is whatever unique key determines the order. It can be a single column, or a comma-delimited list of expressions, as in any ORDER BY clause. fOR EXAMPLE:
...     ,     ROW_NUMBER () OVER ( ORDER BY      UPPER (last_name)
                         ,          UPPER (first_name)
                         ,          created_date     DESC
                       )     AS r_num

Query Requirment

Hi
I had a strange Query Requirement....and wondering is there any way to achieve this with out using Cell editor
In columns i had Previous,Current and Next Year in months (3*12=36) (Restrictions on Current Cal year Variable and Month)
In Rows Formula...but the formula should be Populated with KF X for all the months Less than current month and Populated by Y for all months Greater than Current Month
Any options

So you want if curent is Feb:
lastJan curJan nextJan lastFeb curFeb.....
F: X X Y X Y
define formula variable FV1 replaced by key 0calyear and FV2 replaced by key 0calmonth
F= (FV1<curent year)X+(FV1=curent year)(FV2>=Curent month)Y+(FV1=curent year)(FV2<Curent month)X+(FV1>current year)Y
see note 1385580 about formula var

How to count number of sales orders generated in a month in SAP SD

Hi SD Gurus,
I have a very strange query from client. I have to count the number of sales order created in a month for a z report. For example 30 in Jan, 25 in Feb etc. Could anyone suggest me How to count number of sales orders generated in a month in SAP SD.
Regards
Vinod Kumar

Hi,
Goto the T.Code "SE16" or "SE16n" or "SE11".
Enter the table name as VBAK
Enter the created on date as the starting date of the period and to date as the end date.
Enter.
Click on "Number of Entries".It will tell you the number of entries created in a particular period.
If you want a report,goto the T.Code "VA05n".
Regards,
Krishna.

Strange Query

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for