Re: FW: Informix versus Oracle Spatial

Noons said: > > Superboer apparently said,on my timestamp of 3/12/2005 1:07 AM: > >> Just tryed: >> >> create table nullix( a int, b char(10), primary key(a));>> >> insert into nullix (b) values ('One ');>> >> ---- error does not allow null in col a ... >> >> So obstacle is dictating to have a PK which does not allow nulls in my >> table... > > Try also function-based indexes with the > function being nvl(column,constant). > > >> >> to get the real answer i guess one has to goto the sql specs. >> -- haven't got them; any takers....??? >> > > Exactly. Mark has already mentioned why it is so in Oracle: > it follows the standard while others don't. Not a problem IMO, > you can use the function-based indexes to make it behave like > the others. > > Or use a true PK (which does not allow null values to start > with) if you want to be really specious about standards. > > The important thing to consider is to think outside the box > and use *all* features rather than expect vanilla Oracle to > match other's behaviours: it won't. Have you tried UPDATE STATISTICS? -- Bye now, Obnoxio "C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien ` dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule" - Coluche did i mention i like nulls? heck, i even go so far as to say that all columns in a table except the primary key could/should be nullable. this has certain advantages, for example, if you need to insert a child record and you don't have a parent row for it, just do an insert into the parent table with the primary key value (everything else null), and voila, relational integrity is preserved. but this is, admittedly, a bit controversial among modellers. --r937, dbforums.com sending to informix-list