Results for “expression_id”

AI-generated from documented ETRM metadata — verify critical details on the linked pages.

Overview

The view IGWFV_GRNT_PRPSL_ROUT_RULE_LNE belongs to the IGW (Grants Proposal) product family, identified in the ETRM metadata as Obsolete. It presents the individual expression lines that make up a business routing rule used within the Grants Proposal routing framework. In Oracle EBS 12.1.1 and 12.2.2, routing rules were stored as a header record plus one or more ordered line records, each line representing a Boolean or arithmetic expression fragment. This view flattens the relationship between the rule header and its lines, exposing the rule name alongside the line-level expression elements, so that a rule can be reconstructed in the order in which it was authored.

The view is a read-only construct. Its definition terminates in a WITH READ ONLY clause, meaning no DML can be issued against it. It is intended for inquiry and reporting only, not for maintenance of routing rule data. The ETRM metadata explicitly notes that the view is not implemented in this database, a status consistent with its obsolete classification — the IGW Grants Proposal routing functionality is no longer delivered or supported in current 12.1.1 / 12.2.2 environments.

Underlying Base Objects

The view is defined over two documented base tables:

• IGW_BUSINESS_RULES_ALL — the rule header table, providing rule-level attributes. The view joins to it on RULE_ID and selects RULE_NAME from this source.
• IGW_BUSINESS_RULE_LINES — the line detail table, supplying every expression fragment. The join condition is RULES_ALL.RULE_ID = RULE_LINES.RULE_ID.

Because the header table is suffixed _ALL, it is an Oracle Applications multi-organization (multi-org) table in the standard EBS sense, although the view itself does not expose an ORG_ID column. A single rule header can therefore be associated with multiple line rows, producing a one-to-many result set that is ordered logically by the expression sequence rather than physically by row insertion.

Key Columns

• RULE_NAME — the descriptive name of the parent routing rule, taken from the header table.
• EXPRESSION_SEQUENCE_NUMBER — governs the evaluation order of the fragments that comprise the rule.
• EXPRESSION_TYPE — identifies the nature of the fragment, for example a value test versus a logical grouping.
• LBRACKETS / RBRACKETS — left and right parentheses used to group sub-expressions and control precedence.
• LVALUE / RVALUE — the left and right operands of the expression; RVALUE_ID supplies a key reference when the right operand resolves to a stored entity.
• OPERATOR — the arithmetic or comparison operator joining the operands.
• LOGICAL_OPERATOR — the connective (typically AND / OR) linking one line to the next.
• RULE_ID / EXPRESSION_ID — primary and surrogate keys linking lines to their parent rule and identifying each expression uniquely.
• LAST_UPDATE_DATE, LAST_UPDATED_BY, CREATION_DATE, CREATED_BY — standard EBS audit columns recording who created and last modified each line and when.

Note that the documented column list and the view text differ slightly in spelling: the view text uses LBRACKETS, LVALUE, and RBRACKETS, while the column catalogue lists LEFT_BRACKETS, LEFT_VALUE, ARITHMATIC_OPERATOR, RIGHT_VALUE, and RGHT_VALUE_ID. Queries should be validated against the actual database before reliance.

Common Use Cases and Queries

The principal use case is reconstructing or auditing a routing rule definition. Because lines are stored individually, a report must aggregate them in sequence to display a human-readable rule.

SELECT RULE_NAME,
       EXPRESSION_SEQUENCE_NUMBER,
       LVALUE, OPERATOR, RVALUE,
       LOGICAL_OPERATOR
FROM   IGWFV_GRNT_PRPSL_ROUT_RULE_LNE
WHERE  RULE_NAME = :rule_name
ORDER  BY RULE_NAME, EXPRESSION_SEQUENCE_NUMBER;

A second scenario is locating all rules that reference a particular operator or value, supporting impact analysis before configuration changes. A third is an inventory query listing distinct rule names and their line counts, useful when migrating or documenting legacy Grants Proposal routing setups prior to decommissioning.

Given the obsolete classification, no new development should depend on this view. It remains relevant chiefly for historical data extraction and reverse-engineering of legacy configurations.