Posted by DA Morgan on 10/01/31 11:47

Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
> Latin1_General_CS_AS will solve some problems, but not all:
>
> SQL Server:
>
> CREATE TABLE t1(c1 CHAR(10) COLLATE Latin1_General_CS_AS NOT NULL);
> INSERT INTO t1 VALUES('AAA');
> INSERT INTO t1 VALUES('A_A');
>
> SELECT * FROM T1 order by c1;
>
> c1
> ----------
> A_A
> AAA
>
> (2 row(s) affected)
>
> drop table t1;
>
> The same script in Oracle running on UNIX returns rows in a different
> order:
>
> C1
> ----------
> AAA
> A_A
> 2 rows selected
>

Default tables in Oracle, by definition, are heap tables. Expecting
a specific return ordering of rows, unless you explicitly specify
ORDER BY makes no sense.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace x with u to respond)
Puget Sound Oracle Users Group
www.psoug.org

• Next in forum: update SQL field with stripped data from other field
• Prev in forum: Create view from cursor
• Thread view: Re: SQL2005 collation vs Oracle

[Reply to this message]