Re: [SPAM] 10gR2 Upgrade .. Watch out
- From: "GovindanK" <gkatteri@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Mark J. Bobak" <mark.bobak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 14:42:32 -0800
You are correct .. order of output is not guaranteed unless one
specifies an 'order by' clause explicitly .. but it certainly looks
unacceptable when the default behaviour changes across upgrades .. in
9iRel2 Oracle was doing the sort implicitlly (which should not have been
the case) and they left it high and dry in 10gRel2 reverting back to the
"expected" behaviour .. this results in the mismatch of the output order
across upgrades.
Govindan
On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 17:26:59 -0500, "Mark J. Bobak"
<mark.bobak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
> Well, 1 and 2 are expected behavior (order of output is not guaranteed,
> unless you specify an 'order by' clause, period), but 3 is definitely a
> bug.
>
> -Mark
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
