WHERE clause returning no results - sql

I have the following query:
SELECT *
FROM public."Matches"
WHERE 'Matches.Id' = '24e81894-2f1e-4654-bf50-b75e584ed3eb'
I'm certain there is an existing match with this Id (tried it on other Ids as well), but it returns 0 rows. I'm new to querying with PgAdmin so it's probably just a simple error, but I've read the docs up and down and can't seem to find why this is returning nothing.

Single quotes are only used for strings in SQL. So 'Matches.Id' is a string constant and obviously not the same as '24e81894-2f1e-4654-bf50-b75e584ed3eb' thus the WHERE condition is always false (it's like writing where 1 = 0)
You need to use double quotes for identifiers, the same way you did in the FROM clause.
WHERE "Matches"."Id" = ...
In general the use of quoted identifiers is strongly discouraged.

Related

Find duplicates in case-sensitive query in MS Access

I have a table containing Japanese text, in which I believe that there are some duplicate rows. I want to write a SELECT query that returns all duplicate rows. So I tried running the following query based on an answer from this site (I wasn't able to relocate the source):
SELECT [KeywordID], [Keyword]
FROM Keyword
WHERE [Keyword] IN (SELECT [Keyword]
FROM [Keyword] GROUP BY [Keyword] HAVING COUNT(*) > 1);
The problem is that Access' equality operator treats the two Japanese writing systems - hiragana and katakana - as the same thing, where they should be treated as distinct. Both writing systems have the same phonetic value, although the written characters used to represent the sound are different - e.g. あ (hiragana) and ア (katakana) both represent the sound 'a'.
When I run the above query, however, both of these characters will appear, as according to Access, they're the same character and therefore a duplicate. Essentially it's a case-insensitive search where I need a case-sensitive one.
I got around this issue when doing a simple SELECT to find a Keyword using StrComp to perform a binary comparison, because this method correctly treats hiragana and katakana as distinct. I don't know how I can adapt the query above to use StrComp, though, because it's not directly evaluating one string against another as in the linked question.
Basically what I'm asking is: how can I do a query that will return all duplicates in a table, case-sensitive?
You can use exists instead:
SELECT [KeywordID], [Keyword]
FROM Keyword as k
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM Keyword as k2
WHERE STRCOMP(k2.Keyword, k.KeyWord, 0) = 0 AND
k.KeywordID <> k2.KeywordID
);
Try with a self join:
SELECT k1.[KeywordID], k1.[Keyword], k2.[KeywordID], k2.[Keyword]
FROM Keyword AS k1 INNER JOIN Keyword AS k2
ON k1.[KeywordID] < k2.[KeywordID] AND STRCOMP(k1.[Keyword], k2.[Keyword], 0) = 0

Randomly insert 1 of 3 declared variables

I have three variables that are declared and have an integer value assigned to them.
I am trying to randomly assign the integer value to a field in an UPDATE statement, but get an error.
This is statement I am trying to execute:
FOR user_record IN (SELECT * FROM users_to_add) LOOP
UPDATE
customer."user"
SET
primary_site_id = ({site_GRO, site_WHS, site_SHR}[])[ceil(random()*3)],
WHERE
userid = (SELECT userID FROM customer.user
WHERE emailaddress=user_record.email_address);
END LOOP;
I am getting:
SyntaxError: syntax error at or near "{"
This same format works if the value being randomly selected is a string but since these are variables, the inside curly brackets can't be enclosed in quotes.
Use an ARRAY constructor instead of the (invalid) array literal.
(ARRAY[site_GRO, site_WHS, site_SHR])[ceil(random()*3)]
However, a set-based solution is typically more efficient than looping:
UPDATE customer."user" u
SET primary_site_id = CASE trunc(random()*3)::int
WHEN 0 THEN site_gro -- your variables here
WHEN 1 THEN site_whs
WHEN 2 THEN site_shr
END
FROM users_to_add ua
WHERE u.userid = ua.email_address;
Should achieve the same. Works inside a PL/pgSQL block or as standalone SQL DML command (then you need to interpolate variable values yourself).
A single multi-row UPDATE is much cheaper than many updates in a loop.
trunc() is slightly more correct than ceil(), as random() returns a value in the domain [0,1) (1 excluded). It's also faster.
And a CASE construct is substantially faster than building an array just to extract a single element from it.
Asides:
Avoid reserved words like user as identifiers. Always requires double-quoting, and can lead to confusing errors when forgotten.
Also avoid random capitalization in identifiers. This goes for SQL as well as for PL/pgSQL. See:
Are PostgreSQL column names case-sensitive?
Perhaps you can try splitting the index and array out into their own vars?
FOR user_record IN (SELECT * FROM users_to_add) LOOP
a := ARRAY[site_GRO, site_WHS, site_SHR];
i := ceil(random()*3);
UPDATE
customer."user"
SET
primary_site_id = a[i]
WHERE
userid = (SELECT userID FROM customer.user WHERE emailaddress=user_record.email_address);
END LOOP;

SQL query ignores "not between"

I have a data source like following
If I ran the following sql query it removes all the records with "Seg Type" MOD and ignores the Fnn range given.
select * from NpsoQueue
where SegmentType not in ('MOD')
and Fnn not between 0888452158 and 0888452158
I want the query to consider both conditions. So, if I ran the query it should remove only the first record
The logic in your where clause is incorrect
Use
select * from NpsoQueue
where NOT (
SegmentType = 'MOD'
and Fnn between '0888452158' and '0888452158'
)
Also, a number with a leading zero is a string literal so you need to put single quotes around it to preserve the leading zero and stop implicit casts happening
As mentioned by #TriV you could also use OR. These are fundamental boolean logic concepts, i.e. not related to SQL Server or databases

How to use ANY instead of IN in a WHERE clause?

I used to have a query like in Rails:
MyModel.where(id: ids)
Which generates sql query like:
SELECT "my_models".* FROM "my_models"
WHERE "my_models"."id" IN (1, 28, 7, 8, 12)
Now I want to change this to use ANY instead of IN. I created this:
MyModel.where("id = ANY(VALUES(#{ids.join '),('}))"
Now when I use empty array ids = [] I get the folowing error:
MyModel Load (53.0ms) SELECT "my_models".* FROM "my_models" WHERE (id = ANY(VALUES()))
ActiveRecord::JDBCError: org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: syntax error at or near ")"
ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid: ActiveRecord::JDBCError: org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: ERROR: syntax error at or near ")"
Position: 75: SELECT "social_messages".* FROM "social_messages" WHERE (id = ANY(VALUES()))
from arjdbc/jdbc/RubyJdbcConnection.java:838:in `execute_query'
There are two variants of IN expressions:
expression IN (subquery)
expression IN (value [, ...])
Similarly, two variants with the ANY construct:
expression operator ANY (subquery)
expression operator ANY (array expression)
A subquery works for either technique, but for the second form of each, IN expects a list of values (as defined in standard SQL) while = ANY expects an array.
Which to use?
ANY is a later, more versatile addition, it can be combined with any binary operator returning a boolean value. IN burns down to a special case of ANY. In fact, its second form is rewritten internally:
IN is rewritten with = ANY
NOT IN is rewritten with <> ALL
Check the EXPLAIN output for any query to see for yourself. This proves two things:
IN can never be faster than = ANY.
= ANY is not going to be substantially faster.
The choice should be decided by what's easier to provide: a list of values or an array (possibly as array literal - a single value).
If the IDs you are going to pass come from within the DB anyway, it is much more efficient to select them directly (subquery) or integrate the source table into the query with a JOIN (like #mu commented).
To pass a long list of values from your client and get the best performance, use an array, unnest() and join, or provide it as table expression using VALUES (like #PinnyM commented). But note that a JOIN preserves possible duplicates in the provided array / set while IN or = ANY do not. More:
Optimizing a Postgres query with a large IN
In the presence of NULL values, NOT IN is often the wrong choice and NOT EXISTS would be right (and faster, too):
Select rows which are not present in other table
Syntax for = ANY
For the array expression Postgres accepts:
an array constructor (array is constructed from a list of values on the Postgres side) of the form: ARRAY[1,2,3]
or an array literal of the form '{1,2,3}'.
To avoid invalid type casts, you can cast explicitly:
ARRAY[1,2,3]::numeric[]
'{1,2,3}'::bigint[]
Related:
PostgreSQL: Issue with passing array to procedure
How to pass custom type array to Postgres function
Or you could create a Postgres function taking a VARIADIC parameter, which takes individual arguments and forms an array from them:
Passing multiple values in single parameter
How to pass the array from Ruby?
Assuming id to be integer:
MyModel.where('id = ANY(ARRAY[?]::int[])', ids.map { |i| i})
But I am just dabbling in Ruby. #mu provides detailed instructions in this related answer:
Sending array of values to a sql query in ruby?

SQL FTS and comparison statements

Short story. I am working on a project where I need to communicate with SQLite database. And there I have several problems:
There is one FTS table with nodeId and nodeName columns. I need to select all nodeIds for which nodeNames contains some text pattern. For instance all node names with "Donald" inside. Something similar was discussed in this thread. The point is that I can't use CONTAINS keyword. Instead I use MATCH. And here is the question itself: how should this "Donald" string be "framed"? With '*' or with '%' character? Here is my query:
SELECT * FROM nodeFtsTable WHERE nodeName MATCH "Donald"
Is it OK to write multiple comparison in SELECT statement? I mean something like this:
SELECT * FROM distanceTable WHERE pointId = 1 OR pointId = 4 OR pointId = 203 AND distance<200
I hope that it does not sound very confusing. Thank you in advance!
Edit: Sorry, I missed the fact that you are using FTS4. It looks like you can just do this:
SELECT * FROM nodeFtsTable WHERE nodeName MATCH 'Donald'
Here is relevant documentation.
No wildcard characters are needed in order to match all entries in which Donald is a discrete word (e.g. the above will match Donald Duck). If you want to match Donald as part of a word (e.g. Donalds) then you need to use * in the appropriate place:
SELECT * FROM nodeFtsTable WHERE nodeName MATCH 'Donald*'
If your query wasn't working, it was probably because you used double quotes.
From the SQLite documentation:
The MATCH operator is a special syntax for the match()
application-defined function. The default match() function
implementation raises an exception and is not really useful for
anything. But extensions can override the match() function with more
helpful logic.
FTS4 is an extension that provides a match() function.
Yes, it is ok to use multiple conditions as in your second query. When you have a complex set of conditions, it is important to understand the order in which the conditions will be evaluated. AND is always evaluated before OR (they are analagous to mathematical multiplication and addition, respectively). In practice, I think it is always best to use parentheses for clarity when using a combination of AND and OR:
--This is the same as with no parentheses, but is clearer:
SELECT * FROM distanceTable WHERE
pointId = 1 OR
pointId = 4 OR
(pointId = 203 AND distance<200)
--This is something completely different:
SELECT * FROM distanceTable WHERE
(pointId = 1 OR pointId = 4 OR pointId = 203) AND
distance<200