That's nothing ! We have found a bug in 11g where you cant do a delete from a partitioned table. Initial response from Tech Support - You should use truncate its quicker! Anyway we laughed, ... Most of the time excellent service and docs from Meta link though. On 25/03/2008, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > That is an inexcusably bad note. You are correct, it is imprecise and > arrogant, basically it is useless. Have you brought it to the attention of > a manager? > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Hemant K Chitale <hkchital@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > > In the past 1 (or 2?) years, the quality of notes on MetaLink has > > significantly deteriorated. > > Some are outright misleading (and potentially dangerous to novice DBAs). > > However, in recent months, I have noticed notes that are also > > arrogant or disrespectful > > to the customer. > > > > One example, one which I did send feedback to Oracle Support is Note > > 558846.1. > > > > This is the feedback that I have sent : > > > > I find the language used in Note 558846.1 : > > 1. Unclear > > 2. Arrogant or dismissive > > > > The Symptoms section states > > "Running a SQL script that returns a great amount of data on Windows" > > while the Cause section, referring to Bug6867504 states > > "On Windows if you issue highly recursive or very large SQL > > statements you will blow the RDBMS stack" > > > > Is the Bug logged against "a great amount of data" > > OR is it logged against "highly recursive SQL" > > OR is it logged against "very large SQL statement" > > > > What is "a great amount of data" ? 5MB ? 500MB ? xx number of records > > ? Some figure with respect to a fixed Buffer Size ? > > What is "highly recursive SQL" ? One that makes 10 recursive calls ? > > One that makes 100 recursive calls ? > > What is "very large SQL statement" ? One that has a text length of > > 5000 characters ? A length of 50000 characters ? A length of 5Mbytes ? > > > > Is the langauge "blow the RDBMS stack" one that is used by a > > Technical Support person talking to a DBA/Developer ? > > What does it mean by "blow .. the stack" ? Should it be "exceed the > > hardcoded stack size of 1MB " ? > > > > What is related to the stack size ? "a great amount of data" OR > > "highly recursive SQL" OR "very large SQL statement" ? > > WHERE is the problem ? > > > > Is the solution section > > "Note that any SQL statement that has a lot of repeated values is a > > poor SQL and will probably cause such problems so it's best never to > > use such bad SQL and try to tune your queries. > > If you have a statement that will not work within the 5 MB stack that > > you have adjusted, you will never know what the correct results are > > anyway." > > a REAL WORLD Solution recommendation ? (and, by the way what is "a > > lot of repeated values" ? how many is "a lot" ?) > > > > How does your analyst define "poor SQL" and "bad SQL" in the context > > of this particular Note and Bug ? > > If I have an SQL statement that contains a very long INLIST such that > > it exceeds a certain size (what size ?) is it "poor SQL" or "bad SQL" ? > > And what does the analyst mean by "you will never know what the > > correct results are anyway" ? Is THAT the sort of response > > I expect from an RDBMS vendor ? > > > > > > > > > > Hemant K Chitale > > http://hemantoracledba.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > -- > > //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l > > > > > > > > > -- > Andrew W. Kerber > > 'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.' -- Howard A. Latham