I have a procedure which returns ref cursor as output parameter. I need to find a way to get the count of no.of records in the cursor. Currently I have count fetched by repeating the same select query which is hindering the performance.
ex:
create or replace package temp
TYPE metacur IS REF CURSOR;
PROCEDURE prcSumm (
pStartDate IN DATE,
pEndDate IN DATE,
pKey IN NUMBER,
pCursor OUT metacur
) ;
package body temp is
procedure prcSumm(
pStartDate IN DATE,
pEndDate IN DATE,
pKey IN NUMBER,
pCursor OUT metacur
)
IS
vCount NUMBER;
BEGIN
vCount := 0;
select count(*) into vCount
from customer c, program p, custprog cp
where c.custno = cp.custno
and cp.programid = p.programid
and p.programid = pKey
and c.lastupdate >= pStartDate
and c.lastupdate < pEndDate;
OPEN pCursor for SELECT
c.custno, p.programid, c.fname, c.lname, c.address1, c.address2, cp.plan
from customer c, program p, custprog cp
where c.custno = cp.custno
and cp.programid = p.programid
and p.programid = pKey
and c.lastupdate >= pStartDate
and c.lastupdate < pEndDate;
end prcSumm;
Is there a way to get the no.of rows in the out cursor into vCount.
Thanks!
Oracle does not, in general, know how many rows will be fetched from a cursor until the last fetch finds no more rows to return. Since Oracle doesn't know how many rows will be returned, you can't either without fetching all the rows (as you're doing here when you re-run the query).
Unless you are using a single-user system or you are using a non-default transaction isolation level (which would introduce additional complications), there is no guarantee that the number of rows that your cursor will return and the
count(*)
the second query returns would match. It is entirely possible that another session committed a change between the time that you opened the cursor and the time that you ran thecount(*)
.If you are really determined to produce an accurate count, you could add a
cnt
column defined ascount(*) over ()
to the query you're using to open the cursor. Every row in the cursor would then have a columncnt
which would tell you the total number of rows that will be returned. Oracle has to do more work to generate thecnt
but it's less work than running the same query twice.Architecturally, though, it doesn't make sense to return a result and a count from the same piece of code. Determining the count is something that the caller should be responsible for since the caller has to be able to iterate through the results. Every caller should be able to handle the obvious boundary cases (i.e. the query returns 0 rows) without needing a separate count. And every caller should be able to iterate through the results without needing to know how many results there will be. Every single time I've seen someone try to follow the pattern of returning a cursor and a count, the correct answer has been to redesign the procedure and fix whatever error on the caller prompted the design.