Re: Searching missing number in large data.
- From: Christopher Boyle <cboyle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nigel.cl.thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 12:14:28 -0400
Would Michael's table used as the first table in a minus query against the
production table meet the O requirement? ( i must confess i have not worked
with O evaluations since algorithm class in college) I believe it would
remove the presorting requirement but haven't tested so it is possible I've
missed something (and by possible, i mean the opposite of my chances of
hitting the Powerball Lottery and retiring to a tropical island)
Chris
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Nigel Thomas <
nigel.cl.thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Connor
>
> Only O(n) if the management of 4G * 32bit PL/SQL associative arrays is
> really linear. I suspect it wouldn't quite be at these volumes - 128GB
> of memory required excluding overheads just for this one structure
> :-))
>
> PS Michael's connect by test table has just two problems - (1) it
> arrives sorted and (2) there are no missing numbers...
>
> Regards Nigel
> --
> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>
>
>
Other related posts:
