<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Eddie Awad’s Blog - Latest Comments in One more reason to upgrade your Oracle 8i</title><link>http://awads.disqus.com/</link><description>News, views, tips and tricks on Oracle and other fun stuff</description><atom:link href="https://awads.disqus.com/one_more_reason_to_upgrade_your_oracle_8i/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:18:35 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: One more reason to upgrade your Oracle 8i</title><link>http://awads.net/wp/2006/06/20/one-more-reason-to-upgrade-your-oracle-8i/#comment-3658653</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Anders, thanks for the good and valid tip. For the purpose of demonstrating datatype incompatibilities using only the dual table, "union" should be ok here.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Eddie Awad</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 Jun 2006 13:18:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: One more reason to upgrade your Oracle 8i</title><link>http://awads.net/wp/2006/06/20/one-more-reason-to-upgrade-your-oracle-8i/#comment-3658652</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You should probably use "union all" here. Make it a habbit to use that by default and only use "union" if needed.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">AndersH</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 Jun 2006 12:22:55 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>