... and each case should have its own Line-Number, starting from 1. ..

rethink your requirement - they don't work like that (sequences), they never have - never will. They are not gap free, they are not necessarily sequential even.


I don't know why you would need it to start at one, you can get a sequential number when retrieving if you want:

(select gtt.*, row_number() over (order by something) rn from gtt)

or

(select gtt.*, rownum from (select * from gtt order by something) gtt)


you can use that anywhere you would normally reference just GTT in your query. If the something you order by is unique, this will return the same rownum values given the same data. Be prepared to be "slow" however.

The other alternative would be to use rownum or row_number on the query that populates the table.

But sequences - not a chance.



as our site has restriction for dynamic sql.

funny that, all sql is really dynamic sql under the covers. dynamic sql is not evil, developers can be evil and do things wrong with it (as they can with static sql). Rules like that really annoy me - they are very short sighted. It is true that dynamic sql in plsql should be the last resort - but it should be permitted when necessary.