Skip to main content

PL/SQL Puzzle: What code can be removed?

I published a PL/SQL puzzle on Twitter on November 6 2019. I asked the following question:
Which lines of code can be removed (either entirely or in part) from the block below and not affect the output of the program in any way?
I neglected to mention in my original tweet a few important assumptions:
  1. You are running this code on Oracle Database 10g or higher.
  2. Server output is turned on.
  3. Whitespace (spaces, tabs, new-lines) don't count.
Here's the code. I will publish it as an image, just as I did on Twitter, so that you can give it a go yourself, before taking a look at the answers from me and others below that.
Check out the Twitter conversation for all the answers that were submitted. It's a fun read!

Here are the full lines that I believe can be removed:

2 - There is not need to declare the iterator used in a FOR loop, numeric or cursor versions.

7 - There is no need to declare an "empty" collection to be used to initialize l_objects.

10 - Collections are empty after declaring, always. So no reason to delete.

12 - 15 - Invoking the LAST method on an empty collection always returns NULL, so that call too DBMS_OUTPUT.PUT_LINE will never happen.

17 - This line has no impact on the behavior of the program because SELECT-BULK COLLECT-INTO always wipes out whatever was in the target collection before filling it.

28 - You don't need - and shouldn't use - an EXIT statement inside a FOR loop. It will automatically terminate when all the index values in the collection have been touched.

And here are pieces of code that can be removed from remaining lines:

5 - We do not have to declare this as an associative array. We can remove "INDEX BY PLS_INTEGER", which makes it a nested table. A SELECT-BULK COLLECT-INTO always initializes and extends nested tables and varrays

8 - ":= l_empty" There is no need to initialize a collection with an empty one. It is automatically set to that state.

In which case, the end result is nothing more than this:
   TYPE objects_t IS TABLE OF all_objects.object_name%TYPE;
   l_objects   objects_t;
     SELECT object_name
       BULK COLLECT INTO l_objects
       FROM all_objects
      WHERE object_name LIKE '%TABLE%'
   ORDER BY object_name;

   FOR indx IN 1 .. l_objects.COUNT
      DBMS_OUTPUT.put_line (l_objects (indx));
You can run (and play around with) both versions on LiveSQL with this script.

Did I miss anything? Do you disagree with any of my removals?


  1. I’ve solved my own confusion and replied to you by Twitter. Now my current question is how to write a plsql procedure comparing the output content of two types of PLSQL codes?


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Get rid of mutating table trigger errors with the compound trigger

When something mutates, it is changing. Something that is changing is hard to analyze and to quantify. A mutating table error (ORA-04091) occurs when a row-level trigger tries to examine or change a table that is already undergoing change (via an INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE statement). In particular, this error occurs when a row-level trigger attempts to read or write the table from which the trigger was fired. Fortunately, the same restriction does not apply in statement-level triggers.

In this post, I demonstrate the kind of scenario that will result in an ORA-04091 errors. I then show the "traditional" solution, using a collection defined in a package. Then I demonstrate how to use the compound trigger, added in Oracle Database 11g Release1,  to solve the problem much more simply.

All the code shown in this example may be found in this LiveSQL script.
How to Get a Mutating Table ErrorI need to implement this rule on my employees table:
Your new salary cannot be more than 25x th…

How to Pick the Limit for BULK COLLECT

This question rolled into my In Box today:
In the case of using the LIMIT clause of BULK COLLECT, how do we decide what value to use for the limit? First I give the quick answer, then I provide support for that answer

Quick Answer
Start with 100. That's the default (and only) setting for cursor FOR loop optimizations. It offers a sweet spot of improved performance over row-by-row and not-too-much PGA memory consumption.Test to see if that's fast enough (likely will be for many cases).If not, try higher values until you reach the performance level you need - and you are not consuming too much PGA memory. Don't hard-code the limit value: make it a parameter to your subprogram or a constant in a package specification.Don't put anything in the collection you don't need. [from Giulio Dottorini]Remember: each session that runs this code will use that amount of memory.Background

When you use BULK COLLECT, you retrieve more than row with each fetch, reducing context switchi…

Quick Guide to User-Defined Types in Oracle PL/SQL

A Twitter follower recently asked for more information on user-defined types in the PL/SQL language, and I figured the best way to answer is to offer up this blog post.

PL/SQL is a strongly-typed language. Before you can work with a variable or constant, it must be declared with a type (yes, PL/SQL also supports lots of implicit conversions from one type to another, but still, everything must be declared with a type).

PL/SQL offers a wide array of pre-defined data types, both in the language natively (such as VARCHAR2, PLS_INTEGER, BOOLEAN, etc.) and in a variety of supplied packages (e.g., the NUMBER_TABLE collection type in the DBMS_SQL package).

Data types in PL/SQL can be scalars, such as strings and numbers, or composite (consisting of one or more scalars), such as record types, collection types and object types.

You can't really declare your own "user-defined" scalars, though you can define subtypes from those scalars, which can be very helpful from the perspective…