I would like to combine two tables.
The first table (tbl1) contains all Articles I need.
The second table (tbl2) contains some additional information - but not for every article.
That means in tbl2 are some columns where there is no value.
I am using the following join:
SELECT *
FROM tbl1
LEFT JOIN tbl2 ON tbl1.c4 = tbl2.C4
this join filters all articles, where tbl2.c4 = ''.
But I need the total articles that are listed in tbl1.
How can I manage that?
It is based on Oracle
You can use window functions. I think:
SELECT *
FROM (SELECT t1.*, COUNT(*) OVER () as cnt
FROM tbl1
) t1 LEFT JOIN
tbl2
ON t1.c4 = tbl2.C4;
Related
Suppose I have three tables in PostgreSQL:
table1 - id1, a_id, updated_by_id
table2 - id2, a_id, updated_by_id
Users - id, display_name
Suppose I am using the using the following query:
select count(t1.id1) from table1 t1
left join table2 t2 on (t1.a_id=t2.a_id)
full outer join users u1 t1.updated_by_id=u1.id)
full outer join users u2 t2.updated_by_id=u2.id)
where u1.id=100;
I get 50 as count.
Whereas with:
select count(t1.id1) from table1 t1
left join table2 t2 on (t1.a_id=t2.a_id)
full outer join users u1 t1.updated_by_id=u1.id)
full outer join users u2 t2.updated_by_id=u2.id)
where u2.id=100;
I get only 25 as count.
What is my mistake in the second query? What can I do to get the same count?
My requirement is that there is a single user table, referenced by multiple tables. I want to take the complete list of users and get the count of ids from different tables.
But the table on which I have joined alone returns the proper count but rest of them don't return the proper count. Can anybody suggest a way to modify my second query to get the proper count?
To simplify your logic, aggregate first, join later.
Guessing missing details, this query would give you the exact count, how many times each user was referenced in table1 and table2 respectively for all users:
SELECT *
FROM users u
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT updated_by_id AS id, count(*) AS t1_ct
FROM table1
GROUP BY 1
) t1 USING (id)
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT updated_by_id AS id, count(*) AS t2_ct
FROM table2
GROUP BY 1
) t2 USING (id);
In particular, avoid multiple 1-n relationships multiplying each other when joined together:
Two SQL LEFT JOINS produce incorrect result
To retrieve a single or few users only, LATERAL joins will be faster (Postgres 9.3+):
SELECT *
FROM users u
LEFT JOIN LATERAL (
SELECT count(*) AS t1_ct
FROM table1
WHERE updated_by_id = u.id
) ON true
LEFT JOIN LATERAL (
SELECT count(*) AS t2_ct
FROM table2
WHERE updated_by_id = u.id
) ON true
WHERE u.id = 100;
What is the difference between LATERAL JOIN and a subquery in PostgreSQL?
Explain perceived difference
The particular mismatch you report is due to the specifics of a FULL OUTER JOIN:
First, an inner join is performed. Then, for each row in T1 that does
not satisfy the join condition with any row in T2, a joined row is
added with null values in columns of T2. Also, for each row of T2 that
does not satisfy the join condition with any row in T1, a joined row
with null values in the columns of T1 is added.
So you get NULL values appended on the respective other side for missing matches. count() does not count NULL values. So you can get a different result depending on whether you filter on u1.id=100 or u2.id=100.
This is just to explain, you don't need a FULL JOIN here. Use the presented alternatives instead.
How can I join three or four SQL tables that DO NOT have an equal amount of rows while ensuring that there are no duplicates of a primary/foreign key?
Structure:
Table1: id, first_name, last_name, email
Table2: id (independent of id in table 1), name, location, table1_id, table2_id
Table3: id, name, location
I want all of the data from table 1, then all of the data from table 2 corresponding with the table1_id without duplicates.
Kind of tricky for a new guy...
Not sure what do you want to do with Table3.
A LEFT JOIN returns all records from the LEFT table, and the matched records from the right table. If there is no match (from the right side), then the result is NULL.
So per example:
SELECT * FROM Table1 AS t
LEFT JOIN Table2 AS tt
ON t.id = tt.id
The LEFT table refers to the table statement before the LEFT JOIN, and the RIGHT table refers to the table statement after the LEFT JOIN. If you want to add in Table3 as well, use the same logic:
SELECT * FROM Table1 AS t
LEFT JOIN Table2 AS tt
ON t.id = tt.id
LEFT JOIN Table3 AS ttt
ON t.id = ttt.id
Note, that I use alias names for the tables (by using AS), so that I can more easily refer to a specific table. For example, t refers to Table1, tt refers to Table2, and ttt refers to Table3.
Joins are often used in SQL, therefore it is useful to look into: INNER JOIN, RIGHT JOIN, FULL JOIN, and SELF JOIN, as well.
Hope this helps.
Good luck with learning!
You will want to use an LEFT JOIN
SELECT * FROM table1 LEFT JOIN table2 ON Table1.ID = Table2.table1_id
In postgresql I can use subquery in join condition
SELECT *
FROM table1 LEFT JOIN table2
ON table1.id1 = (SELECT id2 FROM table2 LIMIT 1);
But when I try to use it in Access
SELECT *
FROM table1 LEFT JOIN table2
ON table1.id1 = (SELECT TOP 1 id2 FROM table2);
I get syntax error. Is it actually impossible in Access or just my mistake?
I know that I can get the same result with WHERE, but my question is about possibilities of JOIN in Access.
It's not possible, per the MSDN documentation:
Syntax
FROM table1 [ LEFT | RIGHT ] JOIN table2 ON table1.field1 compopr table2.field2
And (emphasis mine):
field1, field2: The names of the fields that are joined. The fields must be of the same data type and contain the same kind of data, but they do not need to have the same name.
It appears you can't even have hard-coded values in your join; you must specify the column name to join against.
In your case, you would want:
SELECT *
FROM Table1
LEFT JOIN (
SELECT DISTINCT TOP 1 ID
FROM Table2
ORDER BY ID
) Table2Derived ON Table1.ID = Table2Derived.ID
I've got a scenario where I need to do a join across three tables.
table #1 is a list of users
table #2 contains users who have trait A
table #3 contains users who have trait B
If I want to find all the users who have trait A or trait B (in one simple sql) I think I'm stuck.
If I do a regular join, the people who don't have trait A won't show up in the result set to see if they have trait B (and vice versa).
But if I do an outer join from table 1 to tables 2 and 3, I get all the rows in table 1 regardless of the rest of my where clause specifying a requirement against tables 2 or 3.
Before you come up with multiple sqls and temp tables and whatnot, this program is far more complex, this is just the simple case. It dynamically creates the sql based on lots of external factors, so I'm trying to make it work in one sql.
I expect there are combinations of in or exists that will work, but I was hoping for some thing simple.
But basically the outer join will always yield all results from table 1, yes?
SELECT *
FROM table1
LEFT OUTER
JOIN table2
ON ...
LEFT OUTER
JOIN table3
ON ...
WHERE NOT (table2.pk IS NULL AND table3.pk IS NULL)
or if you want to be sneaky:
WHERE COALESCE(table2.pk, table3.pk) IS NOT NULL
but for you case, i simply suggest:
SELECT *
FROM table1
WHERE table1.pk IN (SELECT fk FROM table2)
OR table1.pk IN (SELECT fk FROM table3)
or the possibly more efficient:
SELECT *
FROM table1
WHERE table1.pk IN (SELECT fk FROM table2 UNION (SELECT fk FROM table3)
If you really just want the list of users that have one trait or the other, then:
SELECT userid FROM users
WHERE userid IN (SELECT userid FROM trait_a UNION SELECT userid FROM trait_b)
Regarding outerjoin specifically, longneck's answer looks like what I was in the midst of writing.
I think you could do a UNION here.
May I suggest:
SELECT columnList FROM Table1 WHERE UserID IN (SELECT UserID FROM Table2)
UNION
SELECT columnList FROM Table1 WHERE UserID IN (SELECT UserID FROM Table3)
Would something like this work? Keep in mind depending on the size of the tables left outer joins can be very expensive with regards to performance.
Select *
from table1
where userid in (Select t.userid
From table1 t
left outer join table2 t2 on t1.userid=t2.userid and t2.AttributeA is not null
left outer join table3 t3 on t1.userid=t3.userid and t3.AttributeB is not null
group by t.userid)
If all you want is the ids of the users then
SELECT UserId From Table2
UNION
SELECT UserId From Table3
is totally sufficient.
If you want some more infos from Table1 on these users, you can join the upper SQL to Table 1:
SELECT <list of columns from Table1>
FROM Table1 Join (
SELECT UserId From Table2
UNION
SELECT UserId From Table3) User on Table1.UserID = Users.UserID
Here is my situation:
Table one contains a set of data that uses an id for an unique identifier. This table has a one to many relationship with about 6 other tables such that.
Given Table 1 with Id of 001:
Table 2 might have 3 rows with foreign key: 001
Table 3 might have 12 rows with foreign key: 001
Table 4 might have 0 rows with foreign key: 001
Table 5 might have 28 rows with foreign key: 001
I need to write a report that lists all of the rows from Table 1 for a specified time frame followed by all of the data contained in the handful of tables that reference it.
My current approach in pseudo code would look like this:
select * from table 1
foreach(result) {
print result;
select * from table 2 where id = result.id;
foreach(result2) {
print result2;
}
select * from table 3 where id = result.id
foreach(result3) {
print result3;
}
//continued for each table
}
This means that the single report can run in the neighbor hood of 1000 queries. I know this is excessive however my sql-fu is a little weak and I could use some help.
LEFT OUTER JOIN Tables2-N on Table1
SELECT Table1.*, Table2.*, Table3.*, Table4.*, Table5.*
FROM Table1
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table2 ON Table1.ID = Table2.ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table3 ON Table1.ID = Table3.ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table4 ON Table1.ID = Table4.ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN Table5 ON Table1.ID = Table5.ID
WHERE (CRITERIA)
Join doesn't do it for me. I hate having to de-tangle the data on the client side. All those nulls from left-joining.
Here's a set-based solution that doesn't use Joins.
INSERT INTO #LocalCollection (theKey)
SELECT id
FROM Table1
WHERE ...
SELECT * FROM Table1 WHERE id in (SELECT theKey FROM #LocalCollection)
SELECT * FROM Table2 WHERE id in (SELECT theKey FROM #LocalCollection)
SELECT * FROM Table3 WHERE id in (SELECT theKey FROM #LocalCollection)
SELECT * FROM Table4 WHERE id in (SELECT theKey FROM #LocalCollection)
SELECT * FROM Table5 WHERE id in (SELECT theKey FROM #LocalCollection)
Ah! Procedural! My SQL would look like this, if you needed to order the results from the other tables after the results from the first table.
Insert Into #rows Select id from Table1 where date between '12/30' and '12/31'
Select * from Table1 t join #rows r on t.id = r.id
Select * from Table2 t join #rows r on t.id = r.id
--etc
If you wanted to group the results by the initial ID, use a Left Outer Join, as mentioned previously.
You may be best off to use a reporting tool like Crystal or Jasper, or even XSL-FO if you are feeling bold. They have things built in to handle specifically this. This is not something the would work well in raw SQL.
If the format of all of the rows (the headers as well as all of the details) is the same, it would also be pretty easy to do it as a stored procedure.
What I would do: Do it as a join, so you will have the header data on every row, then use a reporting tool to do the grouping.
SELECT * FROM table1 t1
INNER JOIN table2 t2 ON t1.id = t2.resultid -- this could be a left join if the table is not guaranteed to have entries for t1.id
INNER JOIN table2 t3 ON t1.id = t3.resultid -- etc
OR if the data is all in the same format you could do.
SELECT cola,colb FROM table1 WHERE id = #id
UNION ALL
SELECT cola,colb FROM table2 WHERE resultid = #id
UNION ALL
SELECT cola,colb FROM table3 WHERE resultid = #id
It really depends on the format you require the data in for output to the report.
If you can give a sample of how you would like the output I could probably help more.
Join all of the tables together.
select * from table_1 left join table_2 using(id) left join table_3 using(id);
Then, you'll want to roll up the columns in code to format your report as you see fit.
What I would do is open up cursors on the following queries:
SELECT * from table1 order by id
SELECT * from table1 r, table2 t where t.table1_id = r.id order by r.id
SELECT * from table1 r, table3 t where t.table1_id = r.id order by r.id
And then I would walk those cursors in parallel, printing your results. You can do this because all appear in the same order. (Note that I would suggest that while the primary ID for table1 might be named id, it won't have that name in the other tables.)
Do all the tables have the same format? If not, then if you have to have a report that can display the n different types of rows. If you are only interested in the same columns then it is easier.
Most databases have some form of dynamic SQL. In that case you can do the following:
create temporary table from
select * from table1 where rows within time frame
x integer
sql varchar(something)
x = 1
while x <= numresults {
sql = 'SELECT * from table' + CAST(X as varchar) + ' where id in (select id from temporary table'
execute sql
x = x + 1
}
But I mean basically here you are running one query on your main table to get the rows that you need, then running one query for each sub table to get rows that match your main table.
If the report requires the same 2 or 3 columns for each table you could change the select * from tablex to be an insert into and get a single result set at the end...