Monday, March 20, 2017
So now that Tom Kyte is retired, AskTOM stands for Ask The Oracle Masters. I was checking out some classic AskTom/AskTOM posts, and while some are of course informative, others are are just funny. Here's one that I find more humorous than I should maybe, I bring you...[drumroll]... "What If I forget the name of SavePoint?"
Monday, March 13, 2017
Here's an issue I encountered when installing Oracle on OpenSUSE Linux. Just leaving this here as kind of a bookmark... (This is someone else's post and their environment is different from mine.) https://community.oracle.com/thread/3992606
Friday, March 03, 2017
Oracle 12cR2 is available for download - woohoo! One feature I'm excited about is the real-time materialized view, which allows a stale MV to be used by query rewrite. It sort of applies the changes from the underlying tables in real time. I was going to write up a demonstration of the feature, but a fellow named Uwe Hesse has already provided a very nice one on his blog. Check it out!
Thursday, November 10, 2016
In MySQL I often see developers asking themselves, "Should I make this column an int(10) or int(11)? Should this bigint be bigint(15) or bigint(20)?" The answer is it probably doesn't matter! That number in parentheses does NOT indicate the maximum length of the number. For example, smallint(3) does not max out at 999, but rather it has a range of -32768 to -32767, just like any other smallint (which is 16 bits). The ONLY thing this parenthetical number has anything to do with is an esoteric, display-related feature called ZEROFILL.
ZEROFILL, if enabled, pads the number with zeroes for display purposes -- for example a int(10) with a value of 12345 will come out in your resultset as 0000012345. That's it. That's all it does. Read up more on it here: https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/numeric-type-attributes.html
So, in my opinion you should NEVER even bother to define a column as "int(10)" or "bigint(20)" etc., etc., but rather just define an "int" or a "bigint". The only way to express a max length is in terms of which type to use in the first place: tinyint, smallint, int, bigint. (I think that's all of them - int types anyway. :)) So save yourself the clutter of useless additional information, and save yourself the waste of brainpower thinking about max lengths that aren't even real.
Monday, November 07, 2016
Thursday, July 07, 2016
Saturday, June 11, 2016
In my last post, Cumulative row count over date ranges, I take advantage of a postgres function called generate_series(start, stop) - this generates a series of values, from start to stop. So, for example, generate_series(2,4) returns:
SELECT * FROM generate_series(1,4);
A question that’s been on my mind is how to achieve this in other database systems?
Oracle has a way to generate a series as well, but it’s just not quite as simple as calling a function:
SELECT level i
CONNECT BY level <= 4
Less intuitive but it works nicely. What it’s doing is it uses the CONNECT BY clause on the dual table - this means the 1 column, 1 row dual table is being “connected” to itself recursively — this is called a hierarchical query (https://docs.oracle.com/database/121/SQLRF/queries003.htm). “Level” is a special pseudocolumn that tells you the level of recursion depth. So, while this method is more complicated, it does work nicely!
The MySQL way….
I didn’t know how to achieve generate_series in MySQL off the top of my head, so off to google! Unfortunately the method I found depends on selecting from a table of at least n size, where n is the number of values you wish to generate. Join on a subquery that declares a variable @num, and in your SELECT clause, increment this value per row. I found this solution here, they are using dates but it can be simplified to generate integers. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6870499/generate-series-equivalent-in-mysql
FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.COLUMNS, (select @num:=0) num
| @num:=@num+1 |
| 1 |
| 2 |
| 3 |
| 4 |
4 rows in set, 1 warning (0.02 sec)
Works great but with the caveat that the "dummy" table you select from, in this example INFORMATION_SCHEMA.COLUMNS, must have at least as many rows as you want values. A little scary, in my opinion, to use in a generalized way with this limitation.
MS SQL Server
Oracle-like recursion can be done in SQL Server as well, and wouldn't you know it, some nice developer wrote a generate_series function for SQL Server and shared it on github!
Why is generating a series useful, anyway?
There are probably more use cases for generating a series than I can come up with! But as in the previous post I linked to at the top of this one, a series can be useful for implementing something like a for loop. Join against the series as if it were another table, and use its value (call it i) as a parameter to a function, then voila, suddenly you're calling function f for each value of i: f(1), f(2), ..., f(n). This is a great way to create more elegant queries by avoiding copied/pasted repetition. (Again as see in my last post.)
That's all for now!