I have the following three tables:
CREATE TABLE group (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
name VARCHAR NOT NULL,
insert_date TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE customer (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
ext_id VARCHAR NOT NULL,
insert_date TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE customer_in_group (
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
customer_id INT NOT NULL,
group_id INT NOT NULL,
insert_date TIMESTAMP WITH TIME ZONE NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT customer_id_fk
FOREIGN KEY(customer_id)
REFERENCES customer(id),
CONSTRAINT group_id_fk
FOREIGN KEY(group_id)
REFERENCES group(id)
)
I need to find all of the groups which have not had any customer_in_group entities' group_id column reference them within the last two years. I then plan to delete all of the customer_in_groups that reference them, and finally delete that group after finding them.
So basically given the following two groups and the following 3 customer_in_groups
Group
| id | name | insert_date |
|----|--------|--------------------------|
| 1 | group1 | 2011-10-05T14:48:00.000Z |
| 2 | group2 | 2011-10-05T14:48:00.000Z |
Customer In Group
| id | group_id | customer_id | insert_date |
|----|----------|-------------|--------------------------|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 2011-10-05T14:48:00.000Z |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 2020-10-05T14:48:00.000Z |
| 3 | 2 | 1 | 2011-10-05T14:48:00.000Z |
I would expect just to get back group2, since group1 has a customer_in_group referencing it inserted in the last two years.
I am not sure how I would write the query that would find all of these groups.
As a starter, I would recommend enabling on delete cascade on foreing keys of customer_in_group.
Then, you can just delete the rows you want from groups, and it will drop the dependent rows in the child table. For this, you can use not exists:
delete from groups g
where not exists (
select 1
from customer_in_group cig
where cig.group_id = g.id and cig.insert_date >= now() - interval '2 year'
)
Related
[First of all, if this is a duplicate, sorry, I couldn't find a response for this, as this is a strange solution for a limitation on an ORM and I'm clearly a noobie on SQL]
Domain requirements:
A brigades must be composed by one user (the commissar one) and, optionally, one and only one assistant (1:1)
A user can only be part of one brigade (1:1)
CREATE TABLE Users
(
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
username VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL UNIQUE,
password VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL
);
CREATE TABLE Brigades
(
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
name VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL
);
-- N:M relationship with a flag inside which determine if that user is a commissar or not
CREATE TABLE Brigade_User
(
brigade_id INT NOT NULL REFERENCES Brigades(id)
ON DELETE CASCADE
ON UPDATE CASCADE,
user_id INT NOT NULL REFERENCES Users(id)
ON DELETE CASCADE
ON UPDATE CASCADE,
is_commissar BOOLEAN NOT NULL
PRIMARY KEY(brigade_id, user_id)
);
Ideally, as relations are 1:1, Brigade_User intermediate table could be erased and a Brigade table with two foreign keys could be created instead (this is not supported by Diesel Rust ORM, so I think I'm coupled to first approach)
CREATE TABLE Brigades
(
id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
name VARCHAR(100) NOT NULL
-- 1:1
commisar_id INT NOT NULL REFERENCES Users(id)
ON DELETE CASCADE
ON UPDATE CASCADE,
-- 1:1
assistant_id INT NOT NULL REFERENCES Users(id)
ON DELETE CASCADE
ON UPDATE CASCADE
);
An example...
> SELECT * FROM brigade_user LEFT JOIN brigades ON brigade_user.brigade_id = brigades.id;
brigade_id | user_id | is_commissar | id | name
------------+---------+--------------+----+------------------
1 | 1 | t | 1 | Patrulla gatuna
1 | 2 | f | 1 | Patrulla gatuna
2 | 3 | t | 2 | Patrulla perruna
2 | 4 | f | 2 | Patrulla perruna
3 | 6 | t | 3 | Patrulla canina
3 | 5 | f | 3 | Patrulla canina
(4 rows)
Is it possible to make a query which returns a table like this?
brigade_id | commissar_id | assistant_id | name
-----------+--------------+--------------+--------------------
1 | 1 | 2 | Patrulla gatuna
2 | 3 | 4 | Patrulla perruna
3 | 6 | 5 | Patrulla canina
See that each two rows have been merged into one (remember, a brigade is composed by one commissary and, optionally, one assistant) depending on the flag.
Could this model be improved (having in mind the limitation on multiple foreign keys referencing the same table, discussed here)
Try the following:
with cte as
(
SELECT A.brigade_id,A.user_id,A.is_commissar,B.name
FROM brigade_user A LEFT JOIN brigades B ON A.brigade_id = B.id
)
select C1.brigade_id, C1.user_id as commissar_id , C2.user_id as assistant_id, C1.name from
cte C1 left join cte C2
on C1.brigade_id=C2.brigade_id
and C1.user_id<>C2.user_id
where C1.is_commissar=true
See a demo from here.
I'm looking to use two columns in Table A as foreign keys for either one of two tables: Table B or Table C. Using columns table_a.item_id and table_a.item_type_id, I want to force any new rows to either have a matching item_id and item_type_id in Table B or Table C.
Example:
Table A: Inventory
+---------+--------------+-------+
| item_id | item_type_id | count |
+---------+--------------+-------+
| 2 | 1 | 32 |
| 3 | 1 | 24 |
| 1 | 2 | 10 |
+---------+--------------+-------+
Table B: Recipes
+----+--------------+-------------------+-------------+----------------------+
| id | item_type_id | name | consistency | gram_to_fluid_ounces |
+----+--------------+-------------------+-------------+----------------------+
| 1 | 1 | Delicious Juice | thin | .0048472 |
| 2 | 1 | Ok Tasting Juice | thin | .0057263 |
| 3 | 1 | Protein Smoothie | heavy | .0049847 |
+----+--------------+-------------------+-------------+----------------------+
Table C: Products
+----+--------------+----------+--------+----------+----------+
| id | item_type_id | name | price | in_stock | is_taxed |
+----+--------------+----------+--------+----------+----------+
| 1 | 2 | Purse | $200 | TRUE | TRUE |
| 2 | 2 | Notebook | $14.99 | TRUE | TRUE |
| 3 | 2 | Computer | $1,099 | FALSE | TRUE |
+----+--------------+----------+--------+----------+----------+
Other Table: Item_Types
+----+-----------+
| id | type_name |
+----+-----------+
| 1 | recipes |
| 2 | products |
+----+-----------+
I want to be able to have an inventory table where employees can enter inventory counts regardless of whether an item is a recipe or a product. I don't want to have to have a product_inventory and recipe_inventory table as there are many operations I need to do across all inventory items regardless of item types.
One solution would be to create a reference table like so:
Table CD: Items
+---------+--------------+------------+-----------+
| item_id | item_type_id | product_id | recipe_id |
+---------+--------------+------------+-----------+
| 2 | 1 | NULL | 2 |
| 3 | 1 | NULL | 3 |
| 1 | 2 | 1 | NULL |
+---------+--------------+------------+-----------+
It just seems very cumbersome, plus I'd now need to add/remove products/recipes from this new table whenever they are added/removed from their respective tables. (Is there an automatic way to achieve this?)
CREATE TABLE [dbo].[inventory] (
[id] [bigint] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL,
[item_id] [smallint] NOT NULL,
[item_type_id] [tinyint] NOT NULL,
[count] [float] NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT [PK_inventory_id] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([id] ASC)
) ON [PRIMARY]
What I would really like to do is something like this...
ALTER TABLE [inventory]
ADD CONSTRAINT [FK_inventory_sources] FOREIGN KEY ([item_id],[item_type_id])
REFERENCES {[products] ([id],[item_type_id]) OR [recipes] ([id],[item_type_id])}
Maybe there is no solution as I'm describing it, so if you have any ideas where I can maintain the same/similar schema, I'm definitely open to hearing them!
Thanks :)
Since your products and recipes are stored separately, and appear to mostly have separate columns, then separate inventory tables is probably the correct approach. e.g.
CREATE TABLE dbo.ProductInventory
(
Product_id INT NOT NULL,
[count] INT NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT FK_ProductInventory__Product_id FOREIGN KEY (Product_id)
REFERENCES dbo.Product (Product_id)
);
CREATE TABLE dbo.RecipeInventory
(
Recipe_id INT NOT NULL,
[count] INT NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT FK_RecipeInventory__Recipe_id FOREIGN KEY (Recipe_id)
REFERENCES dbo.Recipe (Recipe_id )
);
If you need all types combined, you can simply use a view:
CREATE VIEW dbo.Inventory
AS
SELECT Product_id AS item_id,
2 AS item_type_id,
[Count]
FROM ProductInventory
UNION ALL
SELECT recipe_id AS item_id,
1 AS item_type_id
[Count]
FROM RecipeInventory;
GO
IF you create a new item_type, then you need to amend the DB design anyway to create a new table, so you would just need to amend the view at the same time
Another possibility, would be to have a single Items table, and then have Products/Recipes reference this. So you start with your items table, each of which has a unique ID:
CREATE TABLE dbo.Items
(
item_id INT IDENTITY(1, 1) NOT NULL
Item_type_id INT NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT PK_Items__ItemID PRIMARY KEY (item_id),
CONSTRAINT FK_Items__Item_Type_ID FOREIGN KEY (Item_Type_ID) REFERENCES Item_Type (Item_Type_ID),
CONSTRAINT UQ_Items__ItemID_ItemTypeID UNIQUE (Item_ID, Item_type_id)
);
Note the unique key added on (item_id, item_type_id), this is important for referential integrity later on.
Then each of your sub tables has a 1:1 relationship with this, so your product table would become:
CREATE TABLE dbo.Products
(
item_id BIGINT NOT NULL,
Item_type_id AS 2,
name VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL,
Price DECIMAL(10, 4) NOT NULL,
InStock BIT NOT NULL,
CONSTRAINT PK_Products__ItemID PRIMARY KEY (item_id),
CONSTRAINT FK_Products__Item_Type_ID FOREIGN KEY (Item_Type_ID)
REFERENCES Item_Type (Item_Type_ID),
CONSTRAINT FK_Products__ItemID_ItemTypeID FOREIGN KEY (item_id, Item_Type_ID)
REFERENCES dbo.Item (item_id, item_type_id)
);
A few things to note:
item_id is again the primary key, ensuring the 1:1 relationship.
the computed column item_type_id (as 2) ensuring all item_type_id's are set to 2. This is key as it allows a foreign key constraint to be added
the foreign key on (item_id, item_type_id) back to the items table. This ensures that you can only insert a record to the product table, if the original record in the items table has an item_type_id of 2.
A third option would be a single table for recipes and products and make any columns not required for both nullable. This answer on types of inheritance is well worth a read.
I think there is a flaw in your database design. The best way to solve your actual problem, is to have Recipies and products as one single table. Right now you have a redundant column in each table called item_type_id. That column is not worth anything, unless you actually have the items in the same table. I say redundant, because it has the same value for absolutely every entry in each table.
You have two options. If you can not change the database design, work without foreign keys, and make the logic layer select from the correct tables.
Or, if you can change the database design, make products and recipies exist in the same table. You already have a item_type table, which can identify item categorization, so it makes sense to put all items in the same table
you can only add one constraint for a column or pair of columns. Think about apples and oranges. A column cannot refer to both oranges and apples. It must be either orange or apple.
As a side note, this can be somehow achieved with PERSISTED COMPUTED columns, however It only introduces overhead and complexity.
Check This for Reference
You can add some computed columns to the Inventory table:
ALTER TABLE Inventory
ADD _recipe_item_id AS CASE WHEN item_type_id = 1 THEN item_id END persisted
ALTER TABLE Inventory
ADD _product_item_id AS CASE WHEN item_type_id = 2 THEN item_id END persisted
You can then add two separate foreign keys to the two tables, using those two columns instead of item_id. I'm assuming the item_type_id column in those two tables is already computed/constraint appropriately but if not you may want to consider that too.
Because these computed columns are NULL when the wrong type is selected, and because SQL Server doesn't check FK constraints if at least one column value is NULL, they can both exist and only one or the other will be satisfied at any time.
Forgive me if this question already ask,not much of db guy here ,
here is what i tried,
select row_number() over (partition by name order by challanto_date) , *
from (
select
rma,
p.id,
p.name,
challanto_date,
CURRENT_TIMESTAMP as fromDate
from challan_to_vendor cv
left join challan_to_vendor_detail cvd on cv.id = cvd.challan_to_vendor_id
inner join main_product p on p.id = cvd.product_id
union all
select
rma,
p.id,
p.name,
CURRENT_TIMESTAMP as toDate,
challan_date
from challan_from_vendor cv
left join challan_from_vendor_detail cvd on cv.id = cvd.challan_from_vendor_id
inner join main_product p on p.id = cvd.product_id
) as a
Here is my create table script :
challan_from_vendor
CREATE TABLE public.challan_from_vendor
(
id character varying NOT NULL,
date_ad date,
rma integer DEFAULT 1,
CONSTRAINT psk PRIMARY KEY (id)
)
challan_from_vendor_detail
CREATE TABLE public.challan_from_vendor_detail
(
id character varying NOT NULL,
challan_from_id character varying,
product_id character varying,
CONSTRAINT psks PRIMARY KEY (id),
CONSTRAINT fsks FOREIGN KEY (challan_from_id)
REFERENCES public.challan_from_vendor (id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION
)
challan_to_vendor;
CREATE TABLE public.challan_to_vendor
(
id character varying NOT NULL,
date_ad date,
rma integer DEFAULT 1,
CONSTRAINT pk PRIMARY KEY (id)
)
challan_to_vendor_detail
CREATE TABLE public.challan_to_vendor_detail
(
id character varying NOT NULL,
challan_to_id character varying,
product_id character varying,
CONSTRAINT pks PRIMARY KEY (id),
CONSTRAINT fks FOREIGN KEY (challan_to_id)
REFERENCES public.challan_to_vendor (id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION
)
product
CREATE TABLE public.product
(
id character varying NOT NULL,
product_name character varying,
CONSTRAINT pks PRIMARY KEY (id)
)
Here is my table structures and desire output.
challan_from_vendor
| id | rma | date |
|:-----------|------------:|:------------:|
| 12012 | 0001 | 2018-11-10
| 123121 | 0001 | 2018-11-11
challan_to_vendor
| id | rma | date |
|:-----------|------------:|:------------:|
| 12 | 0001 | 2018-12-10
| 123 | 0001 | 2018-12-11
challan_from_vendor_detail
| id | challan_from_vendor_id | product_id |
|:-----------|------------:|:------------:|
| 121 | 12012 | 121313
| 1213 | 12012 | 131381
challan_to_vendor_detail
challan_from_vendor_detail
| id | challan_to_vendor_id | product_id |
|:-----------|------------------------|:------------:|
| 121 | 12 | 121313
| 1213 | 123 | 131381
product
| id | product_name |
|:-----------|------------:|
| 191313 | apple |
| 89113 | banana |
Output
| ram | product_id | challan_from_date | challan_to_date|
|:-----------|------------:|:-----------------:|:--------------:|
| 0001 | 191313| 2018-11-10 |2018-11-11 |
| 0001 | 89113 | 2018-12-10 |2018-12-11 |
There is some strange things in the query you have tried so it is not clear what tables, how they are related or what the columns are in those tables.
So by some guessing I give you this to start of with:
select
main_product.*,
challan_to_vendor.toDate,
challan_from_vendor.fromDate
from main_product
join challan_to_vendor using(product_id)
join challan_from_vendor using(product_id)
If you explain more about your db an what you want out of it I might be able to help you more.
Edit: So I could not run your create statements in my db since there was naming conflicts among other minor things. Here is some advice on the create process that I find useful:
Let the id's be integer instead of character varying otherwise it is probably a name-column and should not be named id. You also used integer-id's in your examples.
Use SERIAL PRIMARY KEY (see tutorial) to help you with the key creation. This also removes the naming-conflict since the constraints are given implicit unique names.
Use the same column-name for the same thing in all places to avoid confusion by having multiple things called id after a join plus that it simplify's the join. So for example the id of the product should be product_id in all places, that way you could use using(product_id) as your join condition.
So with the advises given above here's how I would create one of your table and then query them:
CREATE TABLE public.challan_to_vendor_detail
(
challan_to_vendor_detail_id SERIAL PRIMARY KEY,
challan_to_vendor_id integer,
product_id integer,
CONSTRAINT fks FOREIGN KEY (challan_to_vendor_id)
REFERENCES public.challan_to_vendor (challan_to_vendor_id) MATCH SIMPLE
ON UPDATE NO ACTION ON DELETE NO ACTION
);
select
product_name,
challan_to_vendor.date_ad as date_to,
challan_from_vendor.date_ad as date_from
from product
join challan_to_vendor_detail using(product_id)
join challan_to_vendor using(challan_to_vendor_id)
join challan_from_vendor_detail using(product_id)
join challan_from_vendor using(challan_from_vendor_id)
Unfortunately the overall db-design does not make sense to me so I do not know if this is what you expect.
Good luck!
I have the following:
1. A table "patients" where I store patients data.
2. A table "tests" where I store data of tests done to each patient.
Now the problem comes as I have 2 types of tests "tests_1" and "tests_2"
So for each test done to particular patient I store the type and id of the type of test:
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS patients
(
id_patient INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
name_patient VARCHAR(30) NOT NULL,
sex_patient VARCHAR(6) NOT NULL,
date_patient DATE
);
INSERT INTO patients values
(1,'Joe', 'Male' ,'2000-01-23');
INSERT INTO patients values
(2,'Marge','Female','1950-11-25');
INSERT INTO patients values
(3,'Diana','Female','1985-08-13');
INSERT INTO patients values
(4,'Laura','Female','1984-12-29');
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS tests
(
id_test INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
id_patient INTEGER,
type_test VARCHAR(15) NOT NULL,
id_type_test INTEGER,
date_test DATE,
FOREIGN KEY (id_patient) REFERENCES patients(id_patient)
);
INSERT INTO tests values
(1,4,'test_1',10,'2004-05-29');
INSERT INTO tests values
(2,4,'test_2',45,'2005-01-29');
INSERT INTO tests values
(3,4,'test_2',55,'2006-04-12');
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS tests_1
(
id_test_1 INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
id_patient INTEGER,
data1 REAL,
data2 REAL,
data3 REAL,
data4 REAL,
data5 REAL,
FOREIGN KEY (id_patient) REFERENCES patients(id_patient)
);
INSERT INTO tests_1 values
(10,4,100.7,1.8,10.89,20.04,5.29);
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS tests_2
(
id_test_2 INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
id_patient INTEGER,
data1 REAL,
data2 REAL,
data3 REAL,
FOREIGN KEY (id_patient) REFERENCES patients(id_patient)
);
INSERT INTO tests_2 values
(45,4,10.07,18.9,1.8);
INSERT INTO tests_2 values
(55,4,17.6,1.8,18.89);
Now I think this approach is redundant or not to good...
So I would like to improve queries like
select * from tests WHERE id_patient=4;
select * from tests_1 WHERE id_patient=4;
select * from tests_2 WHERE id_patient=4;
Is there a better approach?
In this example I have 1 test of type tests_1 and 2 tests of type tests_2 for patient with id=4.
Here is a fiddle
Add a table testtype (id_test,name_test) and use it an FK to the id_type_test field in the tests table. Do not create seperate tables for test_1 and test_2
It depends on the requirement
For OLTP I would do something like the following
STAFF:
ID | FORENAME | SURNAME | DATE_OF_BIRTH | JOB_TITLE | ...
-------------------------------------------------------------
1 | harry | potter | 2001-01-01 | consultant | ...
2 | ron | weasley | 2001-02-01 | pathologist | ...
PATIENT:
ID | FORENAME | SURNAME | DATE_OF_BIRTH | ...
-----------------------------------------------
1 | hermiony | granger | 2013-01-01 | ...
TEST_TYPE:
ID | CATEGORY | NAME | DESCRIPTION | ...
--------------------------------------------------------
1 | haematology | abg | arterial blood gasses | ...
REQUEST:
ID | TEST_TYPE_ID | PATIENT_ID | DATE_REQUESTED | REQUESTED_BY | ...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1 | 1 | 1 | 2013-01-02 | 1 | ...
RESULT_TYPE:
ID | TEST_TYPE_ID | NAME | UNIT | ...
---------------------------------------
1 | 1 | co2 | kPa | ...
2 | 1 | o2 | kPa | ...
RESULT:
ID | REQUEST_ID | RESULT_TYPE_ID | DATE_RESULTED | RESULTED_BY | RESULT | ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 | 1 | 1 | 2013-01-02 | 2 | 5 | ...
2 | 1 | 2 | 2013-01-02 | 2 | 5 | ...
A concern I have with the above is with the unit of the test result, these can sometimes (not often) change. It may be better to place the unit un the result table.
Also consider breaking these into the major test categories as my understanding is they can be quite different e.g. histopathology and xrays are not resulted in the similar ways as haematology and microbiology are.
For OLAP I would combine request and result into one table adding derived columns such as REQUEST_TO_RESULT_MINS and make a single dimension from RESULT_TYPE and TEST_TYPE etc.
You can do this in a few ways. without knowing all the different type of cases you need to deal with.
The simplest would be 5 tables
Patients (like you described it)
Tests (like you described it)
TestType (like Declan_K suggested)
TestResultCode
TestResults
TestRsultCode describe each value that is stored for each test. TestResults is a pivoted table that can store any number of test-results per test,:
Create table TestResultCode
(
idTestResultCode int
, Code varchar(10)
, Description varchar(200)
, DataType int -- 1= Real, 2 = Varchar, 3 = int, etc.
);
Create Table TestResults
(
idPatent int -- FK
, idTest int -- FK
, idTestType int -- FK
, idTestResultCode int -- FK
, ResultsI real
, ResultsV varchar(100)
, Resultsb int
, Created datetime
)
so, basically you can fit the results you wanted to add into the tables "tests_1" and "tests_2" and any other tests you can think of.
The application reading this table, can load each test and all its values. Of course the application needs to know how to deal with each case, but you can store any type of test in this structure.
In a database that contains many tables, I need to write a SQL script to insert data if it is not exist.
Table currency
| id | Code | lastupdate | rate |
+--------+---------+------------+-----------+
| 1 | USD | 05-11-2012 | 2 |
| 2 | EUR | 05-11-2012 | 3 |
Table client
| id | name | createdate | currencyId|
+--------+---------+------------+-----------+
| 4 | tony | 11-24-2010 | 1 |
| 5 | john | 09-14-2010 | 2 |
Table: account
| id | number | createdate | clientId |
+--------+---------+------------+-----------+
| 7 | 1234 | 12-24-2010 | 4 |
| 8 | 5648 | 12-14-2010 | 5 |
I need to insert to:
currency (id=3, Code=JPY, lastupdate=today, rate=4)
client (id=6, name=Joe, createdate=today, currencyId=Currency with Code 'USD')
account (id=9, number=0910, createdate=today, clientId=Client with name 'Joe')
Problem:
script must check if row exists or not before inserting new data
script must allow us to add a foreign key to the new row where this foreign related to a row already found in database (as currencyId in client table)
script must allow us to add the current datetime to the column in the insert statement (such as createdate in client table)
script must allow us to add a foreign key to the new row where this foreign related to a row inserted in the same script (such as clientId in account table)
Note: I tried the following SQL statement but it solved only the first problem
INSERT INTO Client (id, name, createdate, currencyId)
SELECT 6, 'Joe', '05-11-2012', 1
WHERE not exists (SELECT * FROM Client where id=6);
this query runs without any error but as you can see I wrote createdate and currencyid manually, I need to take currency id from a select statement with where clause (I tried to substitute 1 by select statement but query failed).
This is an example about what I need, in my database, I need this script to insert more than 30 rows in more than 10 tables.
any help
You wrote
I tried to substitute 1 by select statement but query failed
But I wonder why did it fail? What did you try? This should work:
INSERT INTO Client (id, name, createdate, currencyId)
SELECT
6,
'Joe',
current_date,
(select c.id from currency as c where c.code = 'USD') as currencyId
WHERE not exists (SELECT * FROM Client where id=6);
It looks like you can work out if the data exists.
Here is a quick bit of code written in SQL Server / Sybase that I think answers you basic questions:
create table currency(
id numeric(16,0) identity primary key,
code varchar(3) not null,
lastupdated datetime not null,
rate smallint
);
create table client(
id numeric(16,0) identity primary key,
createddate datetime not null,
currencyid numeric(16,0) foreign key references currency(id)
);
insert into currency (code, lastupdated, rate)
values('EUR',GETDATE(),3)
--inserts the date and last allocated identity into client
insert into client(createddate, currencyid)
values(GETDATE(), ##IDENTITY)
go