RE: to_number question
- From: Stephen.Lee@xxxxxxxx
- To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 02:59:11 -0500
> -----Original Message-----
> Actually the subquery gets converted to a sql that has two predicates
> grouped by "AND" (similar to yours).
Well OK. I've kept my mouth shut so far, and because I was getting some
good info, I did not argue with the accusations that I "don't understand".
But I think it's time to clarify some things.
I DO understand 100%, and (if I may be so bold as to speak for others) those
who have questioned the so-called logic understood 100%.
Yes. I'm very well aware that my SQL was essentially getting broken into
two predicates and THEN the un-guaranteed order in the evaluation of
predicates gets applied. The people who argued that this should not be the
case understood it too. The comments were an expression of disbelief (not
lack of understanding) that the specifications concerning subqueries would
be so loose and open ended as to allow this level of unpredictability.
Clearly, that is the case. But that doesn't mean we can't bitch about it.
And bitching about it doesn't mean we don't understand it. You bitch about
taxes, don't you?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at //www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at //www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
