RE: Asked and answered... ORA-1445
- From: "Tornblad, John" <JTornblad@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 10:08:41 -0600
| The reason why you got ORA-1445 is because you didn't use alias for
| rowid and Oracle parser interpreted it as you trying to fetch pseudo
| rowid from the inline view and hence it bis subjected to key preserved
| table requirement.
Sai, that's definitely the issue with the second test case. But the
first one, which works, did not alias the rowid. That, to me, was the
surprising thing... in that case the projected column needed was
satisfied from the index and then the consideration of a key-preserved
table was not an issue. The third test case shows your recommendation.
The whole reason I went down this path was to avoid a massive hash join
(a VERY large one... we just don't have the resources, and as far as I
can tell Oracle is not stingy with its use of TEMP space... ). So I am
working with forcing a Nested Loop (although this test case didn't get
into that). I hate using rowids for anything but I think I just ran
into my first situation where it was unavoidable. And then the
"subtleties" with rowid started popping up.
-john
</pre>This message is confidential, intended only for the named
recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged or
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not
the intended recipient(s), you are notified that the
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is
strictly prohibited. If you receive this message in error or
are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender by
return email and delete this message. Thank you.
--
//www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Other related posts:
