The data type for index variables is implicitly PLS_INTEGER
https://docs.oracle.com/en/database/oracle/oracle-database/21/lnpls/plsql-control-statements.html#GUID-F8D95A75-6475-439E-B3F1-BB3D683E1751
From 21c you can override this in the loop definition:
DECLARE
sseq NUMBER:=2147483646;
eseq NUMBER:=2147483648;
BEGIN
FOR x NUMBER IN sseq..eseq LOOP
dbms_output.put_line(TO_CHAR(x));
END LOOP;
END;
/
2147483646
2147483647
2147483648
On Tue, 27 Sept 2022 at 18:10, Rich J <rich242j@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Howdy,
In 19.16, a dev has a quick anonymous block that fails with "ORA-1426:
numeric overflow". It appears that the FOR...LOOP has a limit of 2G-1. I
can't see where that would be documented or there's some implicit typing
going on that I'm missing. From experimentation:
DECLARE
sseq NUMBER:=2147483647;
eseq NUMBER:=2147483647;
BEGIN
FOR x IN sseq..eseq LOOP
dbms_output.put_line(TO_CHAR(x));
END LOOP;
/
This works. Bumping the end sequence up by 1 and it fails at the FOR
statement with ORA-1426 and nothing is output, so at compile time. I've
tried adding an explicit declaration of "x", changing them all to
NUMBER(12) or PLS_INTEGER, but still get the same error. I can't find any
reference to this limit at:
https://docs.oracle.com/en/database/oracle/oracle-database/19/refrn/database-limits.htm
Am I missing something (very possible) or is this an undocumented limit?
Thanks,
Rich
