Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8205847
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 7, 20262026-06-07T08:25:58+00:00 2026-06-07T08:25:58+00:00

I found this after upgrading from Oracle 11g Release 1 to Release 2. The

  • 0

I found this after upgrading from Oracle 11g Release 1 to Release 2.

The best I can summarize it right now is that a LEFT OUTER JOIN against a query with a constant “fake” column and a WHERE clause generates different results in the two Oracle RELEASES. In Release 2, the “fake” column shows up in the unmatched rows:

TEST1      TEST2
=====      =====
A B        A B 
- ---      - ---
1 bar      1 hello
2 baz

> SELECT * FROM test1 LEFT OUTER JOIN test2 ON test1.a = test2.a;
  A B   A_1 B_1
  - --- --- -----
  1 bar   1 hello
  2 baz   

So far, so good. all of the above works the same on Rel. 1 and 2. Now, add a ‘fake’ constant column X, and things work as expected:

> SELECT * 
    FROM test1 
    LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT test2.*, 'X' AS X 
                       FROM test2) test3 
      ON test1.a = test3.a;

  A B   A_1 B_1   X
  - --- --- ----- -
  1 bar   1 hello X
  2 baz 

Now, add a WHERE clause on the first table and get different results:

> SELECT * 
    FROM test1 
    LEFT OUTER JOIN (SELECT test2.*, 'X' AS X 
                       FROM  test2) test3 
      ON test1.a = test3.a
   WHERE test1.b LIKE 'ba%';

  Release 11.1.0.7.0        Release 11.2.0.2.0    
  ==================        ==================
  A B   A_1 B_1   X         A B   A_1 B_1   X
  - --- --- ----- -         - --- --- ----- -
  1 bar   1 hello X         1 bar   1 hello X
  2 baz                     2 baz           X  <--- WHAT'S THIS?!

Further puzzlement: if the WHERE condition is numeric (e.g., WHERE test1.a < 5, the results are the same!

UPDATE (to clarify my actual question):
What I am doing wrong? Is my final query somehow invoking an undefined behavior making it OK for Oracle to change what’s returned from one release to the next? If not, is this an Oracle bug?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-07T08:26:00+00:00Added an answer on June 7, 2026 at 8:26 am

    So I am going to answer my own question, namely: “Am I doing something wrong or is this an Oracle bug?” with This is an Oracle bug.

    I leave it up to you to navigate the insanity known as support.oracle.com, but, as pointed out by @AdamHawkes, this bug is probably addressed in a recent Oracle patch set. A couple of bugs in the release notes to 11.2.0.3 seem similar to my problem, though not exactly the same.

    I’ll try to come back here and update the answer when I get the latest patches applied (I am in an environment where I am not in control of this).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

After upgrading a project from Flex4 Beta1 to Beta2, I've found that the background-image
I guess that I am missing something here. After having found this sample within
After upgrading from Firefox 3.6 to FF4 i was surprised to see that jQuery
After upgrading our VS2008 Project to VS2010 we found that VS would take 60
After doing lot of research in Google, I found this program: #include <stdio.h> int
I edited this question after i found a solution... i need to understand why
I've found a code which opens this link after logging in to google account
Anyone know what this error means? after googling I found a bunch of sites
found this little code snippet that seems to do what i want, but im
After upgrading from Cake 1.3 to 2.0 I I'm getting missing table errors for

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.