Thursday, July 15, 2004, 9:51:56 AM, Wolfgang Breitling (breitliw@(protected)) wrote:
WB > If you bring something into play
WB > that violates the commutativity, YOU are not playing by the rules, not the
WB > optimizer.
Then I would argue that it is not I who am bringing
something into play that violates the rules, but that SQL
itself is doing so. I fail to see how subqueries in the FROM
clause can fail to violate the commutativity that you speak
of.
I 'm also not convinced yet about what you say, but I want to
go back and do a bit of research before I say more. I you
are correct, then I have some major, mental readjusting to
do.
I also don 't think I 'm looking at the "right " version of
Stephen 's query, because when I tried to execute it I
received an error that made me realize that his query should
not work at all.
Best regards,
Jonathan Gennick --- Brighten the corner where you are
http://Gennick.com * 906.387.1698 * mailto:jonathan@(protected)
Join the Oracle-article list and receive one
article on Oracle technologies per month by
email. To join, visit http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/oracle-article,
or send email to Oracle-article-request@(protected) and
include the word "subscribe " in either the subject or body.
-- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com
-- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------
To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request@(protected)
put 'unsubscribe ' in the subject line.
--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --
