We have table like :
mytable (pid, string_value, int_value)
This table has more than 20M rows in total. Now we have a feature try to mark all the rows from this tables as invalid. So we need update the table columns: string_Value = NULL and int_value = 0 which indicate this is invalid row ( we still want to keep the pid as it is important to us)
So what is the best way?
I use the following SQL:
UPDATE Mytable
SET string_value = NULL,
int_value = 0;
but this query takes more than 4 minutes in my test env. Is there any better way we can improve it?
Updating all the rows can be quite expensive. Often, it is faster to empty the table and reload it.
In generic SQL this looks like:
create table mytable_temp as
select pid
from mytable;
truncate table mytable; -- back it up first!
insert into mytable (pid, string_value, int_value)
select pid, null, 0
from mytable_temp;
The creation of the temporary table may use different syntax, depending on our database.
Updates can take time to complete. Another way of achieving this is to follow the following steps:
Add new columns with the values you need set as the default value
Drop the original columns
Rename the new columns with the names of the original columns.
You can then drop the default values on the new columns.
This needs to be tested as different DBMSs allow different levels of table alters (i.e. not all DMBSs allow a drop default or a drop column).
Related
I found the similar question and solution for the SQL server. I want to replace all my null values with zero or empty strings. I can not use the update statement because my table has 255 columns and using the update for all columns will consume lots of time.
Can anyone suggest to me, how to update all the null values from all columns at once in PostgreSQL?
If you want to replace the data on the fly while selecting the rows you need:
SELECT COALESCE(maybe_null_column, 0)
If you want the change to be saved on the table you need to use an UPDATE. If you have a lot of rows you can use a tool like pg-batch
You can also create a new table and then swap the old one and the new one:
# Create new table with updated values
CREATE TABLE new_table AS
SELECT COALESCE(maybe_null_column, 0), COALESCE(maybe_null_column2, '')
FROM my_table;
# Swap table
ALTER TABLE my_table RENAME TO obsolete_table;
ALTER TABLE new_table RENAME TO my_table;
I have table which contains millions of rows.
I want to delete all the data which is over a week old based on the value of column last_updated.
so here are my two queries,
Approach 1:
Delete from A where to_date(last_updated,''yyyy-mm-dd'')< sysdate-7;
Approach 2:
l_lastupdated varchar2(255) := to_char(sysdate-nvl(p_days,7),'YYYY-MM-DD');
insert into B(ID) select ID from A where LASTUPDATED < l_lastupdated;
delete from A where id in (select id from B);
which one is better considering performance, safety and locking?
Assuming the delete removes a significant fraction of the data & millions of rows, approach three:
create table tmp
Delete from A where to_date(last_updated,''yyyy-mm-dd'')< sysdate-7;
drop table a;
rename tmp to a;
https://asktom.oracle.com/pls/apex/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:2345591157689
Obviously you'll need to copy over all the indexes, grants, etc. But online redefinition can help with this https://oracle-base.com/articles/11g/online-table-redefinition-enhancements-11gr1
When you get to 12.2, there's another simpler option: a filtered move.
This is an alter table move operation, with an extra clause stating which rows you want to keep:
create table t (
c1 int
);
insert into t values ( 1 );
insert into t values ( 2 );
commit;
alter table t
move including rows where c1 > 1;
select * from t;
C1
2
While you're waiting to upgrade to 12.2+ and if you don't want to use the create-as-select method for some reason then approach 1 is superior:
Both methods delete the same rows from A* => it's the same amount of work to do the delete
Option 1 has one statement; Option 2 has two statements; 2 > 1 => option 2 is more work
*Statement level consistency means you might get different results running the processes. Say another session tries to update an old row that your process will remove.
With just the delete, the update will be blocked until the delete finishes. At which point the row's gone, so the update does nothing.
Whereas if you do the insert first, the other session can update & commit the row before the insert completes. So the update "succeeds". But the delete will then remove it! Which can lead to some unhappy customers...
Your stored dateformat seems suitable for proper sorting, so you could go the other way round and convert sysdate to string:
--this is false today
select * from dual where '2019-06-05' < to_char(sysdate-7, 'YYYY-MM-DD');
--this is true today
select * from dual where '2019-05-05' < to_char(sysdate-7, 'YYYY-MM-DD');
So it would be:
Delete from A where last_updated < to_char(sysdate-7, ''yyyy-mm-dd'');
It has the benefit that your default index (if there is any) will be used.
It has the disadvantage on relying on the String/Varchar ordering which might be changed i.e. bei NLS changes (if i remember right), so in any case you should do a little testing before...
In the long term, you should of cource alter the colum to a proper date-datatype, but I guess that doesn't help you right now ;)
If you are trying to delete most of the rows in the table, I would advise you go with a different approach, namely:
create <new table name> as
select *
from <old table name>
where <predicates for the data you want to keep>;
then
drop table <old table name>;
and finally you can rename the new table back to the old table.
You could always partition the new table (i.e. create the new table with a separate statement containing the partitioning clauses, and then have an insert as select into the new table from the old table).
That way, when you need to delete rows, it's a simple matter of dropping the relevant partition(s).
I want to add another row in my existing table and I'm a bit hesitant if I'm doing the right thing because it might skew the database. I have my script below and would like to hear your thoughts about it.
I want to add another row for 'Jane' in the table, which will be 'SKATING" in the ACT column.
Table: [Emp_table].[ACT].[LIST_EMP]
My script is:
INSERT INTO [Emp_table].[ACT].[LIST_EMP]
([ENTITY],[TYPE],[EMP_COD],[DATE],[LINE_NO],[ACT],[NAME])
VALUES
('REG','EMP','45233','2016-06-20 00:00:00:00','2','SKATING','JANE')
Will this do the trick?
Your statement looks ok. If the database has a problem with it (for example, due to a foreign key constraint violation), it will reject the statement.
If any of the fields in your table are numeric (and not varchar or char), just remove the quotes around the corresponding field. For example, if emp_cod and line_no are int, insert the following values instead:
('REG','EMP',45233,'2016-06-20 00:00:00:00',2,'SKATING','JANE')
Inserting records into a database has always been the most common reason why I've lost a lot of my hairs on my head!
SQL is great when it comes to SELECT or even UPDATEs but when it comes to INSERTs it's like someone from another planet came into the SQL standards commitee and managed to get their way of doing it implemented into the final SQL standard!
If your table does not have an automatic primary key that automatically gets generated on every insert, then you have to code it yourself to manage avoiding duplicates.
Start by writing a normal SELECT to see if the record(s) you're going to add don't already exist. But as Robert implied, your table may not have a primary key because it looks like a LOG table to me. So insert away!
If it does require to have a unique record everytime, then I strongly suggest you create a primary key for the table, either an auto generated one or a combination of your existing columns.
Assuming the first five combined columns make a unique key, this select will determine if your data you're inserting does not already exist...
SELECT COUNT(*) AS FoundRec FROM [Emp_table].[ACT].[LIST_EMP]
WHERE [ENTITY] = wsEntity AND [TYPE] = wsType AND [EMP_COD] = wsEmpCod AND [DATE] = wsDate AND [LINE_NO] = wsLineno
The wsXXX declarations, you will have to replace them with direct values or have them DECLAREd earlier in your script.
If you ran this alone and recieved a value of 1 or more, then the data exists already in your table, at least those 5 first columns. A true duplicate test will require you to test EVERY column in your table, but it should give you an idea.
In the INSERT, to do it all as one statement, you can do this ...
INSERT INTO [Emp_table].[ACT].[LIST_EMP]
([ENTITY],[TYPE],[EMP_COD],[DATE],[LINE_NO],[ACT],[NAME])
VALUES
('REG','EMP','45233','2016-06-20 00:00:00:00','2','SKATING','JANE')
WHERE (SELECT COUNT(*) AS FoundRec FROM [Emp_table].[ACT].[LIST_EMP]
WHERE [ENTITY] = wsEntity AND [TYPE] = wsType AND
[EMP_COD] = wsEmpCod AND [DATE] = wsDate AND
[LINE_NO] = wsLineno) = 0
Just replace the wsXXX variables with the values you want to insert.
I hope that made sense.
I have this table which doesn't have a primary key.
I'm going to insert some records in a new table to analyze them and I'm thinking in creating a new primary key with the values from all the available columns.
If this were a programming language like Java I would:
int hash = column1 * 31 + column2 * 31 + column3*31
Or something like that. But this is SQL.
How can I create a primary key from the values of the available columns? It won't work for me to simply mark all the columns as PK, for what I need to do is to compare them with data from other DB table.
My table has 3 numbers and a date.
EDIT What my problem is
I think a bit more of background is needed. I'm sorry for not providing it before.
I have a database ( dm ) that is being updated everyday from another db ( original source ) . It has records form the past two years.
Last month ( july ) the update process got broken and for a month there was no data being updated into the dm.
I manually create a table with the same structure in my Oracle XE, and I copy the records from the original source into my db ( myxe ) I copied only records from July to create a report needed by the end of the month.
Finally on aug 8 the update process got fixed and the records which have been waiting to be migrated by this automatic process got copied into the database ( from originalsource to dm ).
This process does clean up from the original source the data once it is copied ( into dm ).
Everything look fine, but we have just realize that an amount of the records got lost ( about 25% of july )
So, what I want to do is to use my backup ( myxe ) and insert into the database ( dm ) all those records missing.
The problem here are:
They don't have a well defined PK.
They are in separate databases.
So I thought that If I could create a unique pk from both tables which gave the same number I could tell which were missing and insert them.
EDIT 2
So I did the following in my local environment:
select a.* from the_table#PRODUCTION a , the_table b where
a.idle = b.idle and
a.activity = b.activity and
a.finishdate = b.finishdate
Which returns all the rows that are present in both databases ( the .. union? ) I've got 2,000 records.
What I'm going to do next, is delete them all from the target db and then just insert them all s from my db into the target table
I hope I don't get in something worst : - S : -S
The danger of creating a hash value by combining the 3 numbers and the date is that it might not be unique and hence cannot be used safely as a primary key.
Instead I'd recommend using an autoincrementing ID for your primary key.
Just create a surrogate key:
ALTER TABLE mytable ADD pk_col INT
UPDATE mytable
SET pk_col = rownum
ALTER TABLE mytable MODIFY pk_col INT NOT NULL
ALTER TABLE mytable ADD CONSTRAINT pk_mytable_pk_col PRIMARY KEY (pk_col)
or this:
ALTER TABLE mytable ADD pk_col RAW(16)
UPDATE mytable
SET pk_col = SYS_GUID()
ALTER TABLE mytable MODIFY pk_col RAW(16) NOT NULL
ALTER TABLE mytable ADD CONSTRAINT pk_mytable_pk_col PRIMARY KEY (pk_col)
The latter uses GUID's which are unique across databases, but consume more spaces and are much slower to generate (your INSERT's will be slow)
Update:
If you need to create same PRIMARY KEYs on two tables with identical data, use this:
MERGE
INTO mytable v
USING (
SELECT rowid AS rid, rownum AS rn
FROM mytable
ORDER BY
co1l, col2, col3
)
ON (v.rowid = rid)
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE
SET pk_col = rn
Note that tables should be identical up to a single row (i. e. have same number of rows with same data in them).
Update 2:
For your very problem, you don't need a PK at all.
If you just want to select the records missing in dm, use this one (on dm side)
SELECT *
FROM mytable#myxe
MINUS
SELECT *
FROM mytable
This will return all records that exist in mytable#myxe but not in mytable#dm
Note that it will shrink all duplicates if any.
Assuming that you have ensured uniqueness...you can do almost the same thing in SQL. The only problem will be the conversion of the date to a numeric value so that you can hash it.
Select Table2.SomeFields
FROM Table1 LEFT OUTER JOIN Table2 ON
(Table1.col1 * 31) + (Table1.col2 * 31) + (Table1.col3 * 31) +
((DatePart(year,Table1.date) + DatePart(month,Table1.date) + DatePart(day,Table1.date) )* 31) = Table2.hashedPk
The above query would work for SQL Server, the only difference for Oracle would be in terms of how you handle the date conversion. Moreover, there are other functions for converting dates in SQL Server as well, so this is by no means the only solution.
And, you can combine this with Quassnoi's SET statement to populate the new field as well. Just use the left side of the Join condition logic for the value.
If you're loading your new table with values from the old table, and you then need to join the two tables, you can only "properly" do this if you can uniquely identify each row in the original table. Quassnoi's solution will allow you to do this, IF you can first alter the old table by adding a new column.
If you cannot alter the original table, generating some form of hash code based on the columns of the old table would work -- but, again, only if the hash codes uniquely identify each row. (Oracle has checksum functions, right? If so, use them.)
If hash code uniqueness cannot be guaranteed, you may have to settle for a primary key composed of as many columns are required to ensure uniqueness (e.g. the natural key). If there is no natural key, well, I heard once that Oracle provides a rownum for each row of data, could you use that?
Sybase db tables do not have a concept of self updating row numbers. However , for one of the modules , I require the presence of rownumber corresponding to each row in the database such that max(Column) would always tell me the number of rows in the table.
I thought I'll introduce an int column and keep updating this column to keep track of the row number. However I'm having problems in updating this column in case of deletes. What sql should I use in delete trigger to update this column?
You can easily assign a unique number to each row by using an identity column. The identity can be a numeric or an integer (in ASE12+).
This will almost do what you require. There are certain circumstances in which you will get a gap in the identity sequence. (These are called "identity gaps", the best discussion on them is here). Also deletes will cause gaps in the sequence as you've identified.
Why do you need to use max(col) to get the number of rows in the table, when you could just use count(*)? If you're trying to get the last row from the table, then you can do
select * from table where column = (select max(column) from table).
Regarding the delete trigger to update a manually managed column, I think this would be a potential source of deadlocks, and many performance issues. Imagine you have 1 million rows in your table, and you delete row 1, that's 999999 rows you now have to update to subtract 1 from the id.
Delete trigger
CREATE TRIGGER tigger ON myTable FOR DELETE
AS
update myTable
set id = id - (select count(*) from deleted d where d.id < t.id)
from myTable t
To avoid locking problems
You could add an extra table (which joins to your primary table) like this:
CREATE TABLE rowCounter
(id int, -- foreign key to main table
rownum int)
... and use the rownum field from this table.
If you put the delete trigger on this table then you would hugely reduce the potential for locking problems.
Approximate solution?
Does the table need to keep its rownumbers up to date all the time?
If not, you could have a job which runs every minute or so, which checks for gaps in the rownum, and does an update.
Question: do the rownumbers have to reflect the order in which rows were inserted?
If not, you could do far fewer updates, but only updating the most recent rows, "moving" them into gaps.
Leave a comment if you would like me to post any SQL for these ideas.
I'm not sure why you would want to do this. You could experiment with using temporary tables and "select into" with an Identity column like below.
create table test
(
col1 int,
col2 varchar(3)
)
insert into test values (100, "abc")
insert into test values (111, "def")
insert into test values (222, "ghi")
insert into test values (300, "jkl")
insert into test values (400, "mno")
select rank = identity(10), col1 into #t1 from Test
select * from #t1
delete from test where col2="ghi"
select rank = identity(10), col1 into #t2 from Test
select * from #t2
drop table test
drop table #t1
drop table #t2
This would give you a dynamic id (of sorts)