RE: to_number question

  • From: Stephen.Lee@xxxxxxxx
  • To: oracle-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 21:37:54 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> Maybe it has something to do how optimizer transforms your 
> query

I'm thinking that this is probably the case.  The table DOES have entries
that will break to_number; but the output of the subquery does not.  It
looks like the WHERE clause might be operating on the table rather the
result of the subquery.  That was one reason I used the subquery: I know the
output from it will be only numeric.  I didn't (and don't) want to have to
worry about which part of the WHERE clause gets evaluated first:  The "where
nbr_cc_fop_name in ('AX','MC','VI','DS') part"; or the to_number biz.  I
figured if I did the subquery thing, then all the to_number stuff would HAVE
to work.  This sure does look like a "feature" to me (at a list price of
$40,000 per CPU).  Either that, or there are some fine points of SQL and
subqueries I haven't understood yet.  By the way, it never made any
difference if I did the to_number functions inside the subquery or in the
WHERE clause.

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ:
To unsubscribe send email to:  oracle-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.
Archives are at
FAQ is at

Other related posts: