I am facing ORA-01427: single-row subquery returns more than one row error in one of my report. The report was build by previous vendor and it is a big SQL which seems like was generated by some tool and used in the report. I am having a tough time to figure out what's wrong. All the sub queries are either using aggregate functions or ROWNUM = 1 to return 1 record.
Please see if you can give me any pointers to which part I need to focus on. I checked the log files generated by the BIP but it just narrowed down it to the dataset.
Due to large size of the file, I provide the SQL in this file:
SQL
You'll have to scan the query line by line and check all subqueries that do not select an aggregated function (e.g. MIN(..)) and don't contain the ROWNUM = 1 limitation.
Example
(
SELECT
( ko.extn_attribute_timestamp006 )
FROM
moo_ref_entities ko
WHERE
ko.extn_attribute_number001 = lea.id
AND ko.attribute_category = 'RenewalAndOtherOptions_c'
AND nvl(ko.extn_attribute_timestamp003, sysdate) >= sysdate
AND ko.extn_attribute_timestamp005 = (
SELECT
MIN(ko.extn_attribute_timestamp005)
FROM
moo_ref_entities ko
WHERE
ko.extn_attribute_number001 = lea.id
AND ko.attribute_category = 'RenewalAndOtherOptions_c'
AND nvl(ko.extn_attribute_timestamp003, sysdate) >= sysdate
)
) AS option1_exc,
This is a typical trap as you constrain the extn_attribute_timestamp005 with a MIN subquery, but if you have ties in the timestamps you get exact the error you observe.
Here's a SELECT nested in a SELECT list that isn't guaranteed to yield just one row.
(
SELECT FL.lookup_code
FROM fnd_lookups FL
,hz_organization_profiles HO1
WHERE ho1.party_id = LEA.extn_attribute_number010
AND FL.lookup_code = HO1.extn_attribute_char035
AND FL.lookup_type = 'FND_SALES_CATEGORY'
) AS Sales_Category
It wouldn't have been hard for somebody to INSERT something to that fnd_lookups table to make that subquery yield more than one row. You could go for AND ROWNUM=1 or SELECT MAX(FL.lookup_code) lookup_code to see if it helps.
Related
The following simple SQL query generates an ORA-01427 error when searching for certain specific object numbers.
SELECT OBJ
FROM A.TABLEA
WHERE (OBJ ='XXXXXX');
The query works fine except for when you choose an OBJ where there is another OBJ row/s with a corresponding A suffix 'XXXXXXA'.
i.e. querying for OBJ = 'XXXXXXA' works fine, but querying for OBJ = 'XXXXXX' produces the error, alternatively querying for OBJ = 'XXXXXY' works fine when there is no corresponding OBJ = 'XXXXXYA'
Is there a way to handle / avoid the error where it will pick the first/last/random single row?
And going a step further instead of searching for specific Objects I want to search within a date range where I have to join another table to get the date, the error will show if there is a 'XXXXXX' with corresponding 'XXXXXXA' within the date range. See code below,
SELECT
t1.*,
t2.OBJ,
t2.DATE
FROM
A.TABLEA t1
LEFT OUTER JOIN
A.TABLEB t2
ON (t1.OBJ = t2.OBJ)
WHERE
(t2.DATE BETWEEN TO_DATE ('2019/04/01', 'yyyy/mm/dd')
AND TO_DATE ('2019/04/30', 'yyyy/mm/dd');
Is there a way to handle / avoid the error in this code to force it to select 1 row?
Thanks in advance.
I was able to solve this situation by selecting the correct data tables that had the base data (rather than the sql generated table I was originally selecting) and performing the join on the first 12 characters of the object number,
(SUBSTR(t1.OBJ,1,12) = SUBSTR(t2.OBJ,1,12)
where the 13 character had the extra A suffix.
Thanks for your help.
Oracle SQL Developer
I expect to see:
In the subquery, I have that the rownumber be less than 2. When I run this query separately, it gives me 2 accounts. However, when I'm running the entire query, the list of account numbers just goes on! what's happening here?
SELECT m.acctno, i.intervalstartdate, d.name, i.intervalvalue
FROM endpoints E
JOIN meters m on m.acctid = e.acctid
LEFT JOIN intervaldata I ON I.acctid = M.acctid
LEFT JOIN endpointmodels EM ON EM.endpointmodelid=E.hwmodelid
LEFT JOIN datadefinitions D ON D.datadefinitionid = I.datadefinitionid
WHERE 1=1
AND E.statuscodeid = 8
AND m.FORM = 2
and exists
(
SELECT m2.acctno
from acct m2
where m2.acctno is not null
--and m2.acctno=m2.acctno
and rownum <= 2
)
AND D.datadefinitionid =7077
AND I.intervalstartdate BETWEEN '24-SEP-2017 00:00' and '25-SEP-2017 00:00'
--TRUNC(sysdate - 1) + interval '1' hour AND TRUNC(sysdate - 1) + interval
'24' hour
ORDER BY M.acctno, I.intervalstartdate, I.datadefinitionid
This query is supposed to give me 97 rows for each account. The data i'm reading, the interval values, are the data we report for each customer in 96 intervals. so Im expecting for 2 accounts for example, to get 194 rows. i want to test for 2 accounts now, but then i want to run for 50,000. so with 2, it's not even working. Just giving me millions of rows for two accounts. Basicaly, i think my row num line of code is being ignored. I can't use an in clause because i cant pass 50,000 accounts into there. so I used the exist operator.
Let me know!
I think the error is in trying to use and exists (...) clause. The exists predicate returns true if the subquery returns any rows at all. So, in your case, the result of exists will always be true, unless the table is empty. This means it has no effect whatsoever on the outer query. You need to use something like
inner join (SELECT m2.acctno
from acct m2
where m2.acctno is not null
--and m2.acctno=m2.acctno
and rownum <= 2) sub1
on sub1.acctno = m.acctno
to get what you want instead of and exists (...).
One obvious mistake is the date condition, where you require a date to be between two STRINGS. If you keep dates in string format, you will run into thousands of problems and bugs and you won't be able to fix them.
Do you understand that '25-APR-2008 00:00:00' is between '24-SEP-2017 00:00:00' and '25-SEP-2017 00:00:00', if you compare them alphabetically (as strings)?
The solution is to make sure the date column is in DATE (or TIMESTAMP) data type, and then to compare to dates, not to strings.
As an aside - this will not cause any errors, but it is still bad code - in the EXISTS condition you have a condition for ROWNUM <= 2. What do you think that will do? The subquery either returns at least one row (the first one will automatically have ROWNUM = 1) or it doesn't. The condition on ROWNUM in that subquery in the EXISTS condition is just garbage.
I need to figure out how to eliminate older revisions from my query's results, my database stores orders as 'Q000000' and revisions have an appended '-number'. My query currently is as follows:
SELECT DISTINCT Estimate.EstimateNo
FROM Estimate
INNER JOIN EstimateDetails ON EstimateDetails.EstimateID = Estimate.EstimateID
INNER JOIN EstimateDoorList ON EstimateDoorList.ItemSpecID = EstimateDetails.ItemSpecID
WHERE (Estimate.SalesRepID = '67' OR Estimate.SalesRepID = '61') AND Estimate.EntryDate >= '2017-01-01 00:00:00.000' AND EstimateDoorList.SlabSpecies LIKE '%MDF%'
ORDER BY Estimate.EstimateNo
So for instance, the results would include:
Q120455-10
Q120445-11
Q121675-2
Q122361-1
Q123456
Q123456-1
From this, I need to eliminate 'Q120455-10' because of the presence of '-11' for that order, and 'Q123456' because of the presence of the '-1' revision. I'm struggling greatly with figuring out how to do this, my immediate thought was to use case statements but I'm not sure what is the best way to implement them and how to filter. Thank you in advance, let me know if any more information is needed.
First you have to parse your EstimateNo column into sequence number and revision number using CHARINDEX and SUBSTRING (or STRING_SPLIT in newer versions) and CAST/CONVERT the revision to a numeric type
SELECT
SUBSTRING(Estimate.EstimateNo,0,CHARINDEX('-',Estimate.EstimateNo)) as [EstimateNo],
CAST(SUBSTRING(Estimate.EstimateNo,CHARINDEX('-',Estimate.EstimateNo)+1, LEN(Estimate.EstimateNo)-CHARINDEX('-',Estimate.EstimateNo)+1) as INT) as [EstimateRevision]
FROM
...
You can then use
APPLY - to select TOP 1 row that matches the EstimateNo or
Window function such as ROW_NUMBER to select only records with row number of 1
For example, using a ROW_NUMBER would look something like below:
SELECT
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(PARTITION BY EstimateNo ORDER BY EstimateRevision DESC) AS "LastRevisionForEstimate",
-- rest of the needed columns
FROM
(
-- query above goes here
)
You can then wrap the query above in a simple select with a where predicate filtering out a specific value of LastRevisionForEstimate, for instance
SELECT --needed columns
FROM -- result set above
WHERE LastRevisionForEstimate = 1
Please note that this is to a certain extent, pseudocode, as I do not have your schema and cannot test the query
If you dislike the nested selects, check out the Common Table Expressions
I have an sql query in which I have table named attan for the attendance and column named
S_TIME in which I stored in time and out time with a setting a flag of in with I and for O
Now I am trying to get in time as well as out time using the flag. I have written a query but result from this query are making some wrong sense.
Here is my query
SELECT X.AC_NO, X.IN_TIME, Y.OUT_TIME, X.S_DTE, X.CHK_IN, Y.CHK_OUT
FROM (SELECT A.AC_NO, A.S_TIME IN_TIME, A.AC_CHECKTYPE CHK_IN, A.S_DTE
FROM ATTN A
WHERE A.AC_CHECKTYPE = 'I' AND A.S_DTE = :P_DTE) X,
(SELECT B.AC_NO, B.S_TIME OUT_TIME, B.AC_CHECKTYPE CHK_OUT
FROM ATTN B
WHERE B.AC_CHECKTYPE = 'O' AND B.S_DTE = :P_DTE) Y
WHERE X.AC_NO = Y.AC_NO(+)
Through this query I always get the number of records of the employees who are in and only get 2 number of reocrds with out time.
Whereas in table there are 234 number of emps who are in and 256 are out but results don't match the data.
Please any one help me if any problem in my query.
SUGGESTION:
Run the subselects and see if you're getting all the rows you expect, with and without the "A.S_DTE = :P_DTE" date filter:
SELECT A.AC_NO, A.S_TIME IN_TIME, A.AC_CHECKTYPE CHK_IN, A.S_DTE
FROM ATTN A
WHERE A.AC_CHECKTYPE = 'I' AND A.S_DTE = :P_DTE
My first guess is that maybe you have a datetime, and unless the hours/minutes/seconds match exactly, you won't get the row. You can use to_char() to have just the "date" portion in your "from":
http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:204714700346328550
In any case, seeing what rows you do (and don't) get in the subqueries should show you what's wrong with the complete query.
Please post back what you find!
iam not a big ORACLE - SQL Expert, so i hope someone knows a good way to find the "duplicate" record wich is causing the: single-row subquery returns more than one row error.
This my Statement:
SELECT
CAST(af.SAP_SID AS VARCHAR2(4000)) APP_ID,
(SELECT DR_OPTION
FROM
DR_OPTIONS
WHERE DR_OPTIONS.ID = (
select dr_option from applications where applications.sap_sid = af.sap_sid)) DR_OPTION
FROM
APPLICATIONS_FILER_VIEW af
it works on my test system, so iam "sure" there must be an error inside the available data records, but i have no idea how to find those ..
Try with this query:
select applications.sap_sid, count(dr_option)
from applications
group by applications.sap_sid
having count(dr_option) > 1
This should give you the sap_sid of the duplicated rows
I'd suggest simplifying your query:
SELECT CAST(af.SAP_SID AS VARCHAR2(4000)) APP_ID,
dr.DR_OPTION
FROM APPLICATIONS_FILER_VIEW af
INNER JOIN applications a ON af.sap_sid = a.sap_sid
INNER JOIN DR_OPTIONS dr ON a.dr_option = dr.ID
I would investigate what you get when you run:
select dr_option from applications where applications.sap_sid = af.sap_sid
but you could force only one row to be returned (I see this as being a fudge and would not recommend using it at least add an order by to have some control over the row being returned) with something like:
SELECT
CAST(af.SAP_SID AS VARCHAR2(4000)) APP_ID,
(SELECT DR_OPTION
FROM
DR_OPTIONS
WHERE DR_OPTIONS.ID = (
select dr_option
from applications
where applications.sap_sid = af.sap_sid
and rownumber = 1)
) DR_OPTION
FROM
APPLICATIONS_FILER_VIEW af
(not tested just googled how to limit results in oracle)
If you fix the data issue (as per A.B.Cades comment) then I would recommend converting it to use joins as per weenoid's answer. this would also highlight other data issues that may arise in the future.
IN SHORT: I have never fixed anything in this way.. the real answer is to investigate the multiple rows returned and decide what you want to do maybe:
add more where clauses
order the results and only select top row
actually keep the duplicates as they represent a scenario you have not thought of before