Comments for Oramoss Blog

Comment on Installing OBIEE 11.1.1.3.0 on Oracle Enterprise Linux 5.5 by Tweets that mention Installing OBIEE 11.1.1.3.0 on Oracle Enterprise Linux 5.5 « Oramoss Blog -- Topsy.com

Fri, 29 Oct 2010 09:52:40 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by OraNA.info, Daan Bakboord. Daan Bakboord said: RT @orana: Installing OBIEE 11.1.1.3.0 on Oracle Enterprise Linux 5.5 http://dlvr.it/7hTdS [...]

Comment on KEEP DENSE_RANK versus ROW_NUMBER – further details by Blogroll Report 05/03/2010 – 12/03/2010 « Coskan’s Approach to Oracle

Blogroll Report 05/03/2010 – 12/03/2010 « Coskan’s Approach to Oracle — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 01:08:34 +0000

[...] comparison between KEEP DENSE_ RANK and ROW_NUMBER Jeff Moss-KEEP DENSE_RANK versus ROW_NUMBER – further details Leave a [...]

Comment on RANK v DENSE_RANK v ROW_NUMBER by Blogroll Report 26/02/2010 – 05/03/2010 « Coskan’s Approach to Oracle

Blogroll Report 26/02/2010 – 05/03/2010 « Coskan’s Approach to Oracle — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 13:49:09 +0000

[...] 4-Difference between RANK, DENSE_RANK and ROW_NUMBER Jeff Moss-RANK v DENSE_RANK v ROW_NUMBER [...]

Comment on KEEP DENSE_RANK versus ROW_NUMBER – further details by oramoss

oramoss — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 07:26:03 +0000

Absolutely…as always, appropriate use of the technology is always the best way forward.

Good to hear from you.
Cheers
Jeff

Comment on KEEP DENSE_RANK versus ROW_NUMBER – further details by Laurent Schneider

Laurent Schneider — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 22:10:36 +0000

I could also note that with a lot of columns, Dense_rank is pretty ugly and error prone…

Thanks for the followup,
Laurent

Comment on RANK v DENSE_RANK v ROW_NUMBER by Gavin L

Gavin L — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:06:37 +0000

Thanks very much for this Jeff, I appreciate the clarity as I was unaware of the exact difference between rank and row number. Much Appreciated

Comment on RANK v DENSE_RANK v ROW_NUMBER by John H

John H — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 10:10:17 +0000

Jeff,

An “obvious” topic that benefits greatly from such a clear and concise example.

Nice one.

John.

Comment on No pruning for MIN/MAX of partition key column by Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:06:46 +0000

…Not sure I agree…if I use the script I put in the original post, but add your last line (where date_col le 31-dec-9999) then it makes no difference…or in other words, if I take the TSP1 offline, it still thinks it needs to read from it, when it doesn't actually need to, in order to get the MAX date_col value.

Am I misunderstanding you?

Comment on No pruning for MIN/MAX of partition key column by jonathanlewis

jonathanlewis — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 12:25:44 +0000

Jeff,

Sorry for the late addition - but there's an easy way to get the walk through the partitions in descending order:

select max(date_col)
from partitioned_table
where date_col le {maximum value}
;

I've used "le" for "less than or equal to" to avoid problems with html; and for dates the maximum value would be '31-12-9999'.

For numbers you could use the (10g) constant binary_float_integer probably.

Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com

Comment on DBMS_APPLICATION_INFO and V$SESSION by Devang

Devang — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:00:11 +0000

Hi,

Thanks for sharing this information. Its really helpful for debugging purpose.. and not to mention new learning for me.