Re: cant get the correct num of rows from Oracle. in 2 SQL servers ( sql 7.0 and SQL 2000)

From: Tibor Karaszi (tibor_please.no.email_karaszi_at_hotmail.nomail.com)
Date: 10/20/04 

Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:33:43 +0200

I was referring to a trace on the Oracle database, to see what SQL code the Oracle database
receives... 

-- 
Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
"Melih SARICA" <melihsarica@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:%23LDd4vmtEHA.820@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> when i run trace including all events and objects on SQL2000.. there is
> nothing seems wrong to me..
>
> if u want i can give u the trace output.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@hotmail.nomail.com> wrote in
> message news:%23idNF5etEHA.1012@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
>> I was referring to tracing the SQL query, not the result.
>>
>> -- 
>> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>>
>>
>> "Melih SARICA" <melihsarica@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:elS%23DKetEHA.2072@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> > Hi Tibor..
>> >
>> > I did Trace it on Oracle..
>> >
>> > In trace Oracle Send number of 49439 rows for all queries, but SQL 200
> and
>> > SQL 7.0 get rows different.
>> >
>> > And Also i did try it with an Test Oracle Server..
>> >
>> > Its the same..
>> >
>> > SQL 2000 get 99 rows less then SQL 7.0
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@hotmail.nomail.com> wrote
> in
>> > message news:e0kGfVdtEHA.2072@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> >> The reason I asked to post the query was to see whether there is
> anything
>> > in the query that can
>> >> explain the difference. As I said in the original post, one such
>> > possibility id difference regarding
>> >> handling of NULLs.
>> >>
>> >> Also, did you try to catch the SQL statement submitted form SQL Server
> to
>> > Oracle to see if they are
>> >> the same from 7.0 and 2000?
>> >>
>> >> -- 
>> >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Melih SARICA" <melihsarica@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> news:usBSPMdtEHA.4040@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> >> > This Query is just an Example..
>> >> >
>> >> > When i run this query in Oracle number of rows is the same as SQL
> server
>> > 7.0
>> >> > it returns 49439 ..
>> >> >
>> >> > Both MDAC versions are 2.8
>> >> > Both Oracle ODBC Drivers r same 9.2.0.5
>> >> >
>> >> > i did try all attributes.. and  check hundreds of pages from MSDN or
> OTN
>> > but
>> >> > no solution yet ..
>> >> >
>> >> > when i try to get records from Oracle there is always 99 rows
>> > difference.
>> >> > between SQL 2000 and SQL 7.0
>> >> >
>> >> > Not according to rowsize, or table or other things...
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@hotmail.nomail.com>
> wrote
>> > in
>> >> > message news:u%23c3xDdtEHA.1720@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> Is there a tool like Profiler available for Oracle? If so, can you
>> > trace
>> >> > the query submitted to
>> >> >> Oracle and see if they are the same? What if you execute the same
> query
>> >> > directly on the Oracle
>> >> >> Server? What number of rows is the correct number?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -- 
>> >> >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> >> >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> >> >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Melih SARICA" <melihsarica@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:%23pKPi9ctEHA.2520@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> > Ty tibor..
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Query is the same
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > select count(*) from openquery(baanb,'select t$item from
>> >> > baan.ttiitm001501')
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > in SQL server 7.0 this query returns 49439
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > in SQL server 2000 it returns 49340
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > and not only in this query .. if number of rows returned from the
>> >> > openquery
>> >> >> > statement get biggers number of lost rows get bigger too
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Tibor Karaszi" <tibor_please.no.email_karaszi@hotmail.nomail.com>
>> > wrote
>> >> > in
>> >> >> > message news:Oi34g5ctEHA.636@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> >> Possibly handling of NULLS can cause a difference. Can you post
> the
>> > two
>> >> >> > queries?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> -- 
>> >> >> >> Tibor Karaszi, SQL Server MVP
>> >> >> >> http://www.karaszi.com/sqlserver/default.asp
>> >> >> >> http://www.solidqualitylearning.com/
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Melih SARICA" <melihsarica@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> news:%23szluxctEHA.3156@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> >> >I ve got an Oracle 9. server running on AIx.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > and One SQL Server 2000 Sp 3on w2k
>> >> >> >> >  and SQL server 7 on Winnt 4.0
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > i did link this Oracle server on both SQL serevrs. When run an
>> > simple
>> >> >> > SQL
>> >> >> >> > query i got different results.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Num of rows are always different In SQL server 7.0 i got 49430
>> > rows(
>> >> >> > when i
>> >> >> >> > check in oracle its correct)
>> >> >> >> >                                                    In SQL
> SErver
>> > 2000
>> >> > i
>> >> >> > got
>> >> >> >> > 49336 rows.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Any idea ?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Relevant Pages