In the below code, I am trying to get the amount in words for the value in the AMOUNT column but can't seem to get it right. Anyone with an idea? Below the CREATE VIEW statement:
SELECT GLR3 AS RECEIPT_DOC_NO,
GLANI AS ACCOUNT_NUMBER,
GLSBL AS JDE_NO,
(SELECT YAALPH FROM PRODDTA.F060116 WHERE YAAN8 = T1.GLSBL) AS STAFF_NAME,
CASE GLDGJ WHEN 0 THEN TO_DATE (TO_CHAR (1 + 1900000), 'YYYYDDD')
ELSE TO_DATE (TO_CHAR (GLDGJ + 1900000), 'YYYYDDD') END AS GL_DATE,
GLEXA AS NARRATIVE,
GLLT AS LEDGER_TYPE,
GLSBLT AS SUBLEDGER_TYPE,
GLCRCD AS CURRENCY_CODE,
CASE GLAA WHEN 100 THEN ROUND (GLAA / 100, 2) ELSE ROUND (GLAA / 100, 2)
END AS AMOUNT,
(SELECT TO_CHAR(TO_DATE(T1.GLAA,'J'),'JSP')) FROM DUAL) AS AMOUNT_INWORDS
FROM PRODDTA.F0911 T1;
My code is failing with
ORA-00923: FROM keyword not found where expected.
ORA-00923: FROM keyword not found where expected.
Indicates a syntax error. In this case you have three ( and four ):
(SELECT TO_CHAR(TO_DATE(T1.GLAA,'J'),'JSP')) FROM DUAL) AS AMOUNT_INWORDS
The compiler is not expecting the second ) after 'JSP'.
The scalar cursor is unnecessary, so the simplified and corrected version would be:
TO_CHAR(TO_DATE(T1.GLAA,'J'),'JSP') AS AMOUNT_INWORDS
ORA-01854: julian date must be between 1 and 5373484
5373484 is the Julian date for 31-DEC-9999 which is the maximum date allowed in Oracle. This poses an absolute limit on the number which we can spell using JSP mask ... in one go. However, we can use PL/SQL to break larger numbers into chunks and spell those instead. The inestimable Tom Kyte wrote such a function and published it on the AskTom site. Find it here.
I think the value i'm trying to write in words has decimal values (400.00) hence the ORA-01854 error.
The Tom Kyte I linked to does address that issue further down the page. It's this comment here.
Data retrieved in amount column is preceded by a negative symbol when it shouldn't be,
If you simply want to ignore negative values then apply the ABS() function to give you the absolute value.
Related
case 1: SELECT TO_CHAR(12345.6789, '99999D99') FROM dual;
Output: 12345.67
case 2: SELECT TO_CHAR(12345.6789, '999D99') FROM dual;
Output: ######
case 3: SELECT TO_CHAR(12345, '99999D99') FROM dual;
Output: 12345.00
case 4: SELECT TO_CHAR(12345.1, '99999D99') FROM dual;
Output: 12345.10
Here Problem is if we don't know how many digits before decimal then how to manage for correct answer.[only case 1,3,4 can resolved using by TO_CHAR but how to solve for case 2.]
In this case the simplest answer might be to not supply a format model at all, but truncate or round the value to two decimal places:
SELECT TO_CHAR(ROUND(12345.6789, 2)) as rounded,
TO_CHAR(TRUNC(12345.6789, 2)) as truncated
FROM dual;
ROUNDED TRUNCATED
-------- ---------
12345.68 12345.67
From the documentation:
If you omit fmt, then n is converted to a VARCHAR2 value exactly long enough to hold its significant digits.
Otherwise you'd need to supply a format model that allowed for the maximum size of your number; if it's unrestricted you'd need 36 nines, the decimal separator, and two more nines. The result would be padded with spaces so you might also want to trim it, depending on how you'll use the string value.
SELECT TO_CHAR(12345.6789, '999999999999999999999999999999999999D99') as val
FROM dual;
VAL
----------------------------------------
12345.68
You could also do that flexibly by using the length of the truncated value (i.e. once the decimal places have been removed):
SELECT TO_CHAR(12345.6789,
lpad('9', length(trunc(12345.6789)), '9') || 'D99') as val
FROM dual;
VAL
---------
12345.68
But that seems unnecessarily complicated when you can let Oracle work it out for you.
However, if you want the decimals to show trailing zeros then you might need to use that method; but with zeros after the decimal separator:
SELECT TO_CHAR(12345.6, lpad('0', length(trunc(12345.6)), '9') || 'D00') as val
FROM dual;
VAL
---------
12345.60
... which addresses the 3rd and 4th cases you added. I've made it show a leading zero for values less than 1 as well; the generated format model in this case is '99990D00'. The number of nines will still vary depending on the size of your number.
By default Oracle still leaves a space at the start for a potential minus sign. You can avoid that with the FM format modifier:
SELECT TO_CHAR(12345.6, 'FM'
|| lpad('0', length(trunc(12345.6)), '9') || 'D00') as val
FROM dual;
VAL
--------
12345.60
You could always go with the maximum number of digits you expect to be present in the input. If there are fewer digits in the input than your format specifier, it wouldn't affect the outcome in anyway. For instance,
select to_char(12323.5553,'99999D99') from dual
would produce,
123.56
As you said, the length of the input is unknwon. So why would you use a fixed length formater for somthing that is unknown? Does not work. Read your input as String from the beginning and manipulate it as String or even better - BLOB.
Well, to do the rounding correct might be tricky.
So, best check your data if the numbers will realy get so big, because that would mean a lot of work and trouble.
If not more than 38 Digits are needed, you can go with decimal or numeric datatype and (if you insist on a formatter) use the TM formatter for example.
SELECT to_char(cast(1234.456 as decimal( *,2)), 'TM') as a FROM dual
or take the advice that was given above by the other posters.
I've new to PL/SQL (and it's been a while since I've used vanilla SQL). I've got a query that I inherited that I'm trying to schedule in TOAD. In order for that to work I have to change hard coded date references to be calculated at run time.
To that end I added a Declare statement to the front of the query, added the necessary constants, setting them at declaration, and then had the query use them.
When I try to execute an error gets thrown saying a Select Into. To my understanding, SELECT Into is used to set a variable based on a value in the db (based on Constants in Oracle SQL query), whereas I'm looking to define the value independent of any value in the db (in this case the date on the server). The full error follows:
ORA-06550: line 6, column 5:
PLS-00428: an INTO clause is expected in the Select statement
So I'm looking for a little guidance on where my understanding of variables/constants in PL/SQL is off, and also help with getting the following to execute:
DECLARE OLD CONSTANT char(11):= to_Char(SYSDATE - 6, 'DD-MON-YYYY');
NEW CONSTANT char(11):= to_char(SYSDATE, 'DD-MON-YYYY');
BEGIN
SELECT CASE
WHEN (userhost LIKE 'a%'
AND userid IN ('s',
'sub')) THEN 'BATCH'
WHEN userid LIKE 'N%' THEN 'N'
WHEN ((userhost LIKE 'b%'
OR userhost LIKE 'c%')
AND userid IN ('s',
'sub')) THEN 'Forms'
WHEN ((userid LIKE '%_IU%'
OR userid LIKE 'RPT%'
OR userid IN ('q',
'r',
'p'))
AND userhost <> 'n%') THEN 'Interface'
ELSE 'Other'
END app_type , round(sum(sessioncpu/100), 1) cpu_seconds , (sum(sessioncpu/100) / (119*1*60*60) * 100) pct_of_cpu,
trunc(ntimestamp#,'MI')
FROM PERFSTAT.AUD$_ARCHIVE
WHERE ntimestamp# BETWEEN to_timestamp(OLD || ' 23:59','DD-MON-YYYY HH24:MI') AND to_timestamp(NEW || ' 00:00','DD-MON-YYYY HH24:MI')
AND logoff$time < to_date(NEW || ' 00:00','DD-MON-YYYY HH24:MI')
GROUP BY CASE
WHEN (userhost LIKE 'a%'
AND userid IN ('s',
'sub')) THEN 'BATCH'
WHEN userid LIKE 'N%' THEN 'N'
WHEN ((userhost LIKE 'b%'
OR userhost LIKE 'c%')
AND userid IN ('s',
'sub')) THEN 'Forms'
WHEN ((userid LIKE '%_IU%'
OR userid LIKE 'RPT%'
OR userid IN ('q',
'r',
'p'))
AND userhost <> 'n%') THEN 'Interface'
ELSE 'Other'
END app_type,
trunc(ntimestamp#,'MI')
ORDER BY trunc(ntimestamp#,'MI'),
1;
END;
You have two issues here. The first is trying to use the CHAR datatype and then not giving it a length. This defaults to a CHAR(1), i.e. a single character. For memory concerns, you might also consider VARCHAR2 instead. https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17952_01/refman-5.1-en/char.html
The second issue has to do with the INTO clause as mentioned in your question. When you run a SELECT statement in PL/SQL (not associated to DML), you have to give Oracle something to return the result set into. You can then use those variables, whether printing them, storing them, or doing processing with them.
I'd have to see the error, but I think that it may want you to set a length to your char. So, something like char(30).
Also, I'm a big fan of varchar2. Only uses as much space in the DB as the characters in the variable. So, it it's varchar2(500) and has 8 characters, it only uses 8 chars worth of memory.
Your query has an inherent flaw, in that anything that occurs between 23:59 and 0:00 will satisfy conditions at both ends of the range (e.g. something that happens at 23:59:30). If this query were my responsibility, I'd get rid of the variables and the text conversions altogether:
WHERE ntimestamp# >= TRUNC (SYSDATE) - 6
AND ntimestamp# < TRUNC (SYSDATE)
AND logoff$time < TRUNC (SYSDATE)
Using >= and < for dates where you want to avoid an overlap tends to be safer that using between.
Taking a closer look, I'm not sure what the point of your query using one minute before midnight on the lower bound is. That kind of thing is more typically done on the upper bound. Assuming that you're actually doing that for a reason, you can still get around transforming to a string by using either of the following:
WHERE ntimestamp# BETWEEN TRUNC (SYSDATE) - 6 - (1 / 24 / 60)
AND TRUNC (SYSDATE)
AND logoff$time < TRUNC (SYSDATE)
WHERE ntimestamp# BETWEEN TRUNC (SYSDATE)
- NUMTODSINTERVAL (6, 'DAY')
- NUMTODSINTERVAL (1, 'MINUTE')
AND TRUNC (SYSDATE)
AND logoff$time < TRUNC (SYSDATE)
All of that is really just an aside to your main problem though: you need to tell the interpreter what to do with the result of the query. That means that you need to provide a variable to put the result in, then (presumably) do something with the result. One way to do this is to use a cursor loop:
DECLARE
CURSOR cur_query IS
[your query goes here];
BEGIN
FOR r_query IN cur_query LOOP
DBMS_OUTPUT.put_line (r_query.app_type);
DBMS_OUTPUT.put_line (r_query.cpu_seconds);
DBMS_OUTPUT.put_line (r_query.pct_of_cpu);
END LOOP;
END;
Of course, the alternative is just to run your query as SQL, rather than PL/SQL. With the variables eliminated, that will be easier.
Comment Response
PL/SQL blocks are not intended to return query results, like you get if you run straight SQL in Toad. There are ways to fake it via functions that return user-defined types or pipelined functions, but you're better off writing SQL if you are able to (and, in this case, you should be able to).
I'm not sure what you mean by "the variables are supposed to dynamically set the date range to look at". The code provided is returning data relative to sysdate, not getting outside data. You can do that in the query as easily as you can in a PL/SQL block.
A database column (VARCHAR2 datatype) stores the date/time as 13 digit (milliseconds
) unixtimestamp format. Now when I want to compare the column with a oracle date (in question), The error thrown as 'invalid number'
I tried both ways,
converting the 13digit number to Date and compare with the date in question like below. The expressions seems valid as they are printed in select query, but if i include in the where part, it throws 'invalid number'
Here 'value' is 13th digit unixtimestamp column of VARCHAR2 datatype.
select
TO_DATE('1970-01-01', 'YYYY-MM-DD') + value/86400000,
TO_DATE('2014-04-21', 'YYYY-MM-DD')
from dummytable
-- where and TO_DATE('1970-01-01', 'YYYY-MM-DD') + value/86400000 > TO_DATE('2014-04-21', 'YYYY-MM-DD')
converting the date in question to 13digit unixtimestamp and comparing with the database column.The expressions seems valid as they are printed in select query, but if i include in the where part, it throws 'invalid number'
.
select
value,
(to_date('2013-04-21', 'YYYY-MM-DD') - to_date('1970-01-01', 'YYYY-MM-DD')) * (1000*24*60*60)
from dummytable
-- where value > ((to_date('2013-04-21', 'YYYY-MM-DD') - to_date('1970-01-01', 'YYYY-MM-DD')) * (1000*24*60*60))
any pointers? Thanks in advance.
[EDIT- 1 day later] I see the problem now. There are some data (other rows) for the 'value' column that are non-numeric. But I have another column say field, where always field='date' return value as 13 digit timestamp. Now I think when 'where' condition executes, although the field='date' is in the condition, it is still validating the other values for 'value' which are non-numeric. Is there a way to avoid this ?
Your code works just fine. The problem is in your data. Some of your values is not a number.
create table test
(value varchar2(13));
insert into test(value) values('2154534689000');
--insert into test(value) values('2 54534689000');
select TO_DATE('1970-01-01', 'YYYY-MM-DD') + value/86400000
from test
where TO_DATE('1970-01-01', 'YYYY-MM-DD') + value/86400000 > TO_DATE('2014-04-21', 'YYYY-MM-DD');
This code works fine. But if you uncommented the second insert, you would get exactly the same invalid number error as you get.
UPD. Allan gave you a nice hint, but i feel that it can be good to explain you a bit about views. The fact that you select from a view CAN make a difference. A view is not stored somewhere physically, when you select from it, it is just "added to your query". And then Oracle Query Optimizer starts working. Among other things, it can change the order in which your where predicates are evaluated.
For example, your the view query can have a line where value is not null and it would normally show only 'good' values. But if your query has a predicate where to_date(value,'ddmmyyyy') > sysdate, Oracle can decide to evaluate your predicate earlier, because Oracle predicts that it would "cut off" more rows, thus making the whole query faster and less momery consuming. Of course, execution will crash because of an attempt to convert a null string to date.
I believe, that Allan in his answer that he gave a link to, gave a great way to solve this problem: "wrapping" your query in a subquery that Oracle can't "unwrap":
select value
from
(select value
from my_view
where rownum > 0)
where to_date(value,'ddmmyyyy') > sysdate
Hope that helps.
I have a cursor which selects date from column with NUMBER type containg floating point numbers. Numbers like 4,3433 are returned properly while numbers smaller then 1 have removed leading zero.
For example number 0,4513 is returned as ,4513.
When I execute select used in the cursor on the database, numbers are formatted properly, with leading zeros.
This is how I loop over the recors returned by the cursor:
FOR c_data IN cursor_name(p_date) LOOP
...
END LOOP;
Any ideas why it works that way?
Thank you in advance.
You're confusing number format and number value.
The two strings 0.123 and .123, when read as a number, are mathematically equals. They represent the same number. In Oracle the true number representation is never displayed directly, we always convert a number to a character to display it, either implicitly or explicitly with a function.
You assume that a number between 0 and 1 should be represented with a leading 0, but this is not true by default, it depends on how you ask this number to be displayed. If you don't want unexpected outcome, you have to be explicit when displaying numbers/dates, for example:
to_char(your_number, '9990.99');
It's the default number formatting that Oracle provides.
If you want to specify something custom, you shall use TO_CHAR function (either in SQL query or PL/SQL code inside the loop).
Here is how it works:
SQL>
SQL> WITH aa AS (
2 select 1.3232 NUM from dual UNION ALL
3 select 1.3232 NUM from dual UNION ALL
4 select 332.323 NUM from dual UNION ALL
5 select 0.3232 NUM from dual
6 )
7 select NUM, to_char(NUM, 'FM999990D9999999') FORMATTED from aa
8 /
NUM FORMATTED
---------- ---------------
1.3232 1.3232
1.3232 1.3232
332.323 332.323
.3232 0.3232
SQL>
In this example, 'FM' - suppresses extra blanks, '0' indicates number digit including leading/trailing zeros, and '9' indicates digit suppressing leading/trailing zeros.
You can find many examples here:
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14200/sql_elements004.htm#i34570
My code in the stored procedure:
SELECT * FROM
my_table ir
WHERE
--where clause goes here
ORDER BY
CASE WHEN p_order_by_field='Id' AND p_sort_order='ASC' THEN IR.ID end,
CASE WHEN p_order_by_field='Id' AND p_sort_order='DESC' THEN IR.ID end DESC,
CASE WHEN p_order_by_field='Date' AND p_sort_order='ASC' THEN TO_CHAR(IR.IDATE, 'MM/dd/yyyy') end,
CASE WHEN p_order_by_field='Date' AND p_sort_order='DESC' THEN TO_CHAR(IR.IDATE, 'MM/dd/yyyy') end DESC;
Problem is that sorting is done based on the char, which comes out wrong for the date case. CASE statement, however, won't allow any other datatype other than char. So what is the solution in this case? I need to be able to pass the p_order_by_field into the stored procedure.
Thanks
Should be simple - just use ISO date format in your case:
TO_CHAR(IR.IDATE, 'yyyy-mm-dd')
and you should be fine.
Another problem could occure when you want to sort on the date difference (let say number of days between two days).
For example such a sort would return number 13 (days) before 9 (days).
The solution is that you concatenate length of date difference and the difference itself:
length(trunc(date2) - trunc(date1)) || to_char(date2 - date1)