Apologize for the terrible title. Unsure how to express my need succinctly. I know there is an answer for this with MySQL, but it does not work for Oracle
I have a table where my OrderID field is not distinct as it by line item on the order. When a user deletes certain line items from the order and approves the order, I get a completion date for the line item that was approved, and a null value for those deleted. I need to update the completiondate for all of the lines on that order. This is what it looks like
And this is what I am looking for
I have found code that will update if I pick a specific OrderID, but if I open it up to scan the entire table, it will take 35 hrs (not feasible, obviously)
update batchmgr.udt_buyer a set a.completedate=(select b.completedate from batchmgr.udt_buyer b where b.completedate is not null and b.orderid=a.orderid) where a.orderid ='221292540';
You can use:
update batchmgr.udt_buyer b
set completedate = (select b2.completedate
from batchmgr.udt_buyer b2
where b2.completedate is not null and
b2.orderid = b.orderid and
rownum = 1
)
where b.orderid = '221292540' and b.completedate is null;
For performance, you want an index on (orderid, completate).
Also, be sure that orderid is a string. If not drop the single quotes on the constant coparison.
I would use max() just in case if you have different completion dates for the same order:
update batchmgr.udt_buyer a
set a.completedate=(select max(b.completedate)
from batchmgr.udt_buyer b
where b.completedate is not null
and b.orderid=a.orderid)
where a.orderid ='221292540';
Or you can create a view with analytic function max() over to get the same without updates:
create or replace view v_order_items as
select
OrderId
,Buyer
,OrderType
,Item
,CreateDate
,max(CompleteDate)over(partition by OrderId) as CompleteDate
from batchmgr.udt_buyer;
But it would be better to normalize your data and store orders separately from order items.
Related
I want to change the orders state to shipped if the order_no is inside the today shipped table using sql in query. (i using ms accsess)
You can use a where clause. For instance:
update orders
set State = 'shipped'
where order_no in (select ts.order_no from todayshipped as ts);
You might want to add and State <> 'shipped' to avoid updating already shipped rows.
For performance reasons, I often suggest exists instead:
update orders
set State = 'shipped'
where exists (select 1
from todayshipped as ts
where ts.order_no = orders.order_no
);
This can easily take advantage of an index on todayshipped(order_no).
I have one table named: ORDERS
this table contains OrderNumber's which belong to the same person and same address lines for that person.
However sometimes the data is inconsistent;
as example looking at the table screenshot: Orders table with bad data to fix -
you all can noticed that orderNumber 1 has a name associated to and addresses line1-2-3-4. sometimes those are all different by some character or even null.
my goal is to update all those 3 lines with one set of data that is already there and set equally all the 3 rows.
to make more clear the result expected should be like this:
enter image description here
i am currently using a MERGE statement to avoid a CURSOR (for loop )
but i am having problems to make it work
here the SQL
MERGE INTO ORDERS O USING
(SELECT
INNER.ORDERNUMBER,
INNER.NAME,
INNER.LINE1,
INNER.LINE2,
INNER.LINE3,
INNER.LINE4
FROM ORDERS INNER
) TEMP
ON( O.ORDERNUMBER = TEMP.ORDERNUMBER )
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE
SET
O.NAME = TEMP.NAME,
O.LINE1 = TEMP.LINE1,
O.LINE2 = TEMP.LINE2,
O.LINE3 = TEMP.LINE3,
O.LINE4 = TEMP.LINE4;
the biggest issues i am facing is to pick a single row out of the 3 randomly - it does not matter whihc of the data - row i pick to update the line/s
as long i make the records exaclty the same for an order number.
i also used ROWNUM =1 but it in multip[le updates will only output one row and update maybe thousand of lines with the same address and name whihch belong to an order number.
order number is the join column to use ...
kind regards
A simple correlated subquery in an update statement should work:
update orders t1
set (t1.name, t1.line1, t1.line2, t1.line3, t1.line4) =
(select t2.name, t2.line1, t2.line2, t2.line3, t2.line4
from orders t2
where t2.OrderNumber = t1.OrderNumber
and rownum < 2)
struggling with this one, quite a lengthy description so ill explain best I can:
I have a table with 12 columns in, 1 being a primary key with identity_insert, 1 a foreign key , the other 10 being cost values, ive created a statement to group them into 5 categories, shown below:
select
(ProductID)ProjectID,
sum(Cost1)Catagory1,
sum(Cost2)Catagory2,
sum(Cost3 + Cost4 + Cost5 + Cost6 + Cost7) Catagory3,
sum(Cost 8 + Cost 9)Catagory4,
sum(Cost10)Catagory5
from ProductTable group by ProductID
ive changed the names of the data to make it more generic, they aren't actually called Cost1 etc by the way ;)
the foreign key can appear multiple times (ProductID) so in the above query the related fields are calculated together based upon this... Now what ive been trying to do is put this query into a table, which i have done successfully, and then update the data via a procedure. the problem im having is that all the data in the table is overwritten by row 1 and when theres is thousands of rows this is a problem.
I have also tried putting the above query into a view and the same result... any suggestions would be great :)
update NewTable set
ProductID = (ProductView.ProductID ),
Catagory1 = (ProductView.Catagory1 ),
Catagory2 = (ProductView.Catagory2 ),
Catagory3 = (ProductView.Catagory3 ),
Catagory4 = (ProductView.Catagory4 ),
Catagory5 = (ProductView.Catagory5 )
from ProductView
I need something along the lines like above.... but one that doesn't overwrite everything with row 1 haha ;)
ANSWERED BY: Noman_1
create procedure NewProducts
insert into NewTable
select ProductID.ProductTable,
Catagory1.ProductView,
Catagory2.ProductView,
Catagory3.ProductView,
Catagory4.ProductView,
Catagory5.ProductView
from ProductView
inner join ProductTable on ProductView.ProductID = ProductTable.ProductID
where not exists(select 1 from NewTable where ProductView.ProductID = NewTable.ProductID)
above procedure locates the new Product that has been created within a view, the procedure query detects that there is a Product that is not located in the NewTable and inserts it via the procedure
As far as i know, and since you want to update all the products in the table, and each product uses all the sums of the product itself from origin, you actually need to update each row 1 by 1, and as consecuence when you do an update like the next, its your only main way
update newtable
set category1 = (select sum(cost1) from productTable where productTable.productId = newtable.ProductID),
category2 = (select sum(cost2) from productTable where productTable.productId = newtable.ProductID),
etc..
Keep in mind that if you have new products, they wont get inserted with the update, you would need like this in order to add them:
Insert into newtable
Select VALUES from productTable a where productId not exists(select 1 from newTable b where a.ProductId = b.ProductId);
A second way, and since you want allways to update all the data, is to simply truncate and do a insert select right after.
Maybe on an Oracle, you would be albe to use a MERGE but im unaware if it would really improve anything.
I asume that simply having a view would not work due the amount of data you state you have.
EDIT, I never knew that the MERGE STATMENT is actually avaiable on SQL Server 2008 and above, with this single statment you could do an UPDATE/INSERT on all but it's efficiency is unknown to me, you may want to test it with your high amount of data:
MERGE newtable AS TARGET
USING select ProductId, sum(cost1) cat1, sum(cost2) cat2 ...
FROM productTable Group by ProductId AS SOURCE
ON TARGET.ProductId = SOURCE.ProductID
WHEN MATCHED
THEN UPDATE SET TARGET.category1 = cat1, TARGET.category2 = cat2...
WHEN NOT MATCHED
THEN INSERT (ProductId, category1, category2,...)
VALUES (SOURCe.ProductId, SOURCE.cat1, SOURCE.cat2...);
More info about merge here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/bb510625.aspx
The example at the end may give you a good overview of the sintax
You haven't given any join condition. SQL Server cannot know that you meant to update rows matched by productid.
update NewTable set
ProductID = (ProductView.ProductID ),
Catagory1 = (ProductView.Catagory1 ),
Catagory2 = (ProductView.Catagory2 ),
Catagory3 = (ProductView.Catagory3 ),
Catagory4 = (ProductView.Catagory4 ),
Catagory5 = (ProductView.Catagory5 )
from NewTable
join ProductView pv on NewTable.productid = pv.productid
You don't need a view. Just past the view query to the place where I said ProductView. Of course, you can use a view.
i have loanTable that contain two field loan_id and status
loan_id status
==============
1 0
2 9
1 6
5 3
4 5
1 4 <-- How do I select this??
4 6
In this Situation i need to show the last Status of loan_id 1 i.e is status 4. Can please help me in this query.
Since the 'last' row for ID 1 is neither the minimum nor the maximum, you are living in a state of mild confusion. Rows in a table have no order. So, you should be providing another column, possibly the date/time when each row is inserted, to provide the sequencing of the data. Another option could be a separate, automatically incremented column which records the sequence in which the rows are inserted. Then the query can be written.
If the extra column is called status_id, then you could write:
SELECT L1.*
FROM LoanTable AS L1
WHERE L1.Status_ID = (SELECT MAX(Status_ID)
FROM LoanTable AS L2
WHERE L2.Loan_ID = 1);
(The table aliases L1 and L2 could be omitted without confusing the DBMS or experienced SQL programmers.)
As it stands, there is no reliable way of knowing which is the last row, so your query is unanswerable.
Does your table happen to have a primary id or a timestamp? If not then what you want is not really possible.
If yes then:
SELECT TOP 1 status
FROM loanTable
WHERE loan_id = 1
ORDER BY primaryId DESC
-- or
-- ORDER BY yourTimestamp DESC
I assume that with "last status" you mean the record that was inserted most recently? AFAIK there is no way to make such a query unless you add timestamp into your table where you store the date and time when the record was added. RDBMS don't keep any internal order of the records.
But if last = last inserted, that's not possible for current schema, until a PK addition:
select top 1 status, loan_id
from loanTable
where loan_id = 1
order by id desc -- PK
Use a data reader. When it exits the while loop it will be on the last row. As the other posters stated unless you put a sort on the query, the row order could change. Even if there is a clustered index on the table it might not return the rows in that order (without a sort on the clustered index).
SqlDataReader rdr = SQLcmd.ExecuteReader();
while (rdr.Read())
{
}
string lastVal = rdr[0].ToString()
rdr.Close();
You could also use a ROW_NUMBER() but that requires a sort and you cannot use ROW_NUMBER() directly in the Where. But you can fool it by creating a derived table. The rdr solution above is faster.
In oracle database this is very simple.
select * from (select * from loanTable order by rownum desc) where rownum=1
Hi if this has not been solved yet.
To get the last record for any field from a table the easiest way would be to add an ID to each record say pID. Also say that in your table you would like to hhet the last record for each 'Name', run the simple query
SELECT Name, MAX(pID) as LastID
INTO [TableName]
FROM [YourTableName]
GROUP BY [Name]/[Any other field you would like your last records to appear by]
You should now have a table containing the Names in one column and the last available ID for that Name.
Now you can use a join to get the other details from your primary table, say this is some price or date then run the following:
SELECT a.*,b.Price/b.date/b.[Whatever other field you want]
FROM [TableName] a LEFT JOIN [YourTableName]
ON a.Name = b.Name and a.LastID = b.pID
This should then give you the last records for each Name, for the first record run the same queries as above just replace the Max by Min above.
This should be easy to follow and should run quicker as well
If you don't have any identifying columns you could use to get the insert order. You can always do it like this. But it's hacky, and not very pretty.
select
t.row1,
t.row2,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY t.[count]) AS rownum from (
select
tab.row1,
tab.row2,
1 as [count]
from table tab) t
So basically you get the 'natural order' if you can call it that, and add some column with all the same data. This can be used to sort by the 'natural order', giving you an opportunity to place a row number column on the next query.
Personally, if the system you are using hasn't got a time stamp/identity column, and the current users are using the 'natural order', I would quickly add a column and use this query to create some sort of time stamp/incremental key. Rather than risking having some automation mechanism change the 'natural order', breaking the data needed.
I think this code may help you:
WITH cte_Loans
AS
(
SELECT LoanID
,[Status]
,ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY (SELECT 1)) AS RN
FROM LoanTable
)
SELECT LoanID
,[Status]
FROM LoanTable L1
WHERE RN = ( SELECT max(RN)
FROM LoanTable L2
WHERE L2.LoanID = L1.LoanID)
I have been trying to search for this and am not sure I am using the correct terms. Or it might just be that it's not possible. But what I am trying to do is update all records in a table that make up a sum value that is less than a set value.
So here is an example:
ID type amount received_date processed_date
1 debit 10 7/1/2010 NULL
2 debit 10 7/2/2010 NULL
3 debit 10 7/3/2010 NULL
Now what I want to do is update all records that are equal to a sum of less than 22. So when I would do the sum id 1 and 2 would equal 20 which is less than 22. But it also needs to be only records that have a null for processed_date. I also want it to work so that it updates from oldest to newest.
Basically here is how I would write it in pseudo code:
UPDATE credits
SET date_processed = '8/1/2010'
WHERE SUM(amount) <= #total AND
credit_type = [debits]
But I know that this doesn't work. So I'm hoping some SQL master might have ideas.
I'm sure I could write this within a cursor but I'm wondering if there is a set based way to perform this.
EDIT: I updated the table and brief description below to better portray my circumstance.
Rows in a SQL table, represent an unordered list of items. Thus, we have to provide an order. In your example, you hint that it should process the rows ordered by Id.
Update TableName
Set processed_date = '2010-08-01'
Where [type] = 'debit'
And Exists (
Select 1
From TableName As C1
Where C1.Id <= TableName.Id
And C1.[type] = 'debit'
Having Sum(C1.amount) <= #total
)
As I mentioned in comments, it is not safe to depend on Id being the marker for sequence. It is possible to have gaps and for someone to insert "later" rows into those gaps using IDENTITY_INSERT. Instead, you should use a datetime column. If that column is received_date, then simply substitute Id for received_date in the above query.
You should use the HAVING clause for this type of situations.
According to w3schools, "The HAVING clause was added to SQL because the WHERE keyword could not be used with aggregate functions."
UPDATE credits
SET date_processed = '8/1/2010'
WHERE credit_type = [debits]
HAVING SUM(amount) <= #total
Here is a great tutorial found on w3schools
http://www.w3schools.com/SQL/sql_having.asp