My sql report has lots of inner queries. I have to pass the list of values in where clause. Same values are being passed few times. It takes more than 10 minutes to execute this query. Is there any way to optimise replacing the where condition with array or some other mechanism.
This list of IDs are used multiple times inside the nested queries.
List of IDS= SELECT ID
FROM Employee
where City = 'Berlin'
...............
This is a snippet of my query (not fully copied just wanted to show how I used above list in where conditions)
SELECT Job_id,client_id,details
FROM Clients
where employeedID not in ( ***SELECT ID
FROM Employee
where City = 'Berlin*'**)
where WORKID in (SELECT [WORKID]
FROM Client_projects
where DESCRIPTION in (SELECT [DESCRIPTION]
FROM Projects
where employeedID in (***SELECT ID
FROM Employee
where City = 'Berlin'***)
where taskname = 'Project in Progress'))) and TASKNAME like '%Progress') and description in (SELECT [DESCRIPTION]
FROM Client
where employeeID in (***SELECT ID
FROM Employee
where City = 'Berlin'***
where taskname = 'Project Completed')) and STATUS not in ('Cancelled','Closed')
.........
I tried to create an array to pass the value but couldn't succeed .
I would suggest using common table expression instead of repeating select ID..
with ListOfIDS as (
select ID
from Employee
where City = 'Berlin'
) select *
from otherTable
join ListOfIDS on ListOfIDS.ID = otherTable.ID
...
this simplifies query.
I also suspect what is killing your performance is TASKNAME like '%Progress' as this is not sargable.
Related
Having received kindness the other day from someone whose eyes were less bleary than mine I thought I'd give it another shot. Thanks in advance for your assistance.
I have a single SQL Server (2012) table named Contacts. That table has four columns I am currently concerned with. The table has a total of 71,454 rows. There are two types of records in the table; Companies and Employees. Both use the same column, named (Client ID), for their primary key. The existence of a Company Name is what differentiates between Company and Employee data. Employees have no associated Company Name. There are 29,021 Companies leaving 42,433 Employees.
There may be 0-n number of Employees associated with any one Company. I am attempting to create output that will reflect the relationship between Companies and Clients, if there are any. I would like to use the Company ID (Client ID column) as my anchor data set.
Not sure my definition is correct but the thought was to create a CTE of the known Companies by virtue of a given Company Name. Then, use the remaining Client IDs but use the EXCEPT clause to filter the already-retrieved Client IDs out of the result set.
Here the code I currently have;
;
WITH cte ( BaseID, Client_id, Company_name,
First_name, Last_name, [level] )
AS ( SELECT Client_id AS BaseID ,
Client_id ,
Company_name ,
First_name ,
Last_name ,
1
FROM dbo.Conv_client_clean
WHERE ( COMPANY_NAME IS NOT NULL
OR COMPANY_NAME != ''
)
UNION ALL
SELECT c.BaseID ,
children.Client_id ,
children.Company_name ,
children.First_name ,
children.Last_name ,
cte.[level] + 1
FROM dbo.Conv_client_clean children
INNER JOIN cte c ON c.Client_id = children.CLIENT_ID
EXCEPT
SELECT children.Client_id
FROM cte
)
SELECT BaseID ,
Client_id ,
Company_name ,
first_name ,
Last_name ,
[Level]
FROM cte
OPTION ( MAXRECURSION 0 );
In this instance I receive the following error;
Msg 252, Level 16, State 1, Line 3
Recursive common table expression 'cte' does not contain a top-level UNION ALL operator.
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
In the recursion cte query, you cannot have more set operations(union, except, union all,intersect) after the the one Union ALL which is refers the cte itself. I think what you can try is change the query as below and check
...
UNION ALL
SELECT c.BaseID ,
children.Client_id ,
children.Company_name ,
children.First_name ,
children.Last_name ,
cte.[level] + 1
FROM dbo.Conv_client_clean children
WHERE children.Client_id NOT IN (SELECT Client_id FROM cte)
As mentioned to Kiran I was able to concoct an 'old fashioned' approach what is good enough for now.
Thank you everyone for your kind attention.
I'm not sure what you are trying to do with level. It seems that it will be 1 for companies and 2 for employees. If that's the case, you don't even need recursion. The first part of your cte creates a list of companies. That's fine. Now use that to join back to the original table to show all the employees too.
WITH
cte( BaseID, ClientID, Company_name, First_name, Last_name )AS(
SELECT Base_ID,
Base_ID AS Client_id ,
Company_name,
First_name,
Last_name
FROM dbo.Conv_client_clean
WHERE COMPANY_NAME IS NOT NULL
OR COMPANY_NAME <> ''
)
select c2.Base_id, c2.Client_id,
c1.Company_Name, c2.First_Name, c2.Last_Name,
case when c2.client_id is null then 1 else 2 end Level
from cte c1
join Conv_client_clean c2
on c1.BaseID = isnull( c2.Client_ID, c2.Base_id )
order by c1.BaseID, c2.Base_id;
Here's where I fiddled with it.
Unfortunately anything besides UNION ALL, after you've made your recursive reference, will not work. And if you think about it, it makes sense.
Recursion is conceptually identical to the following where recursion continues until max depth is reached or a query returns no results upon which another execution could act.
WITH Anchor AS (select...)
,recurse1 as (<Some body referring to Anchor>)
,recurse2 as (<Identical body except referring to recurse1>)
,recurse3 as (<Identical body except referring to recurse2>)
...
select * from Anchor
union all
select * from recurse1
union all
select * from recurse2
...
The problem is that conjunctive operators apply to EVERYTHING that precedes it. In your case, EXCEPT operates on everything to it's left side which includes the Anchor query. Afterwards, when looking for the anchor to which the recursive part must be applied, the query compiler doesn't find a 'top level union all operator' any more because it's been consumed as part of the left side of your recursive query.
It wouldn't help to contrive some syntax akin to parenthesis that could delimit the scope of the left side of your table conjunction because you would then build a case of 'multiple recursive references' which is also illegal.
BOTTOM LINE IS: The only conjunction that works in the recursive part of your query is UNION ALL because it simply concatenates the right side. It doesn't require knowledge of the left side to determine which rows to include.
I have two situations in my query , One where I need to use group by clause and other where i do Not want to use group by
So in below query If Name = Map .. then use group by..like this (Means show Only distinct Id's)
select max(start_time),id,name from workitem where ( NAME = 'Map' or NAME = 'Validate') group by id,name;
But if in the above query when Name Not equal 'Map' then DO NOT use group by..like this (Means show all id's even duplicates)
select start_time,id,name from workitem where ( NAME = 'Map' or NAME = 'Validate');
How can i achieve this with one query
select max(start_time),id
from workitem where ( NAME = 'Map' or NAME = 'Validate')
group by id,name
UNION ALL
select start_time,id
from workitem
where NAME <> 'Map';
I have 2 Tables in Ms Access
tbl_Master_Employess
tbl_Emp_Salary
I want to show all the employees in the employee table linked with employee salary table
to link both table the id is coluqEmpID in both table
In the second table, I have a date column. I need a query which should fetch records from both tables using a particular date
I tried the following query:
select coluqEID as EmployeeID , colEName as EmployeeName,"" as Type, "" as Amt
from tbl_Master_Employee
union Select b.coluqEID as EmployeeID, b.colEName as EmployeeName, colType as Type, colAmount as Amt
from tbl_Emp_Salary a, tbl_Master_Employee b
where a.coluqEID = b.coluqEID and a.colDate = #12/09/2013#
However, it shows duplicates.
Query4
EmployeeID EmployeeName Type Amt
1 LAKSHMANAN
1 LAKSHMANAN Advance 100
2 PONRAJ
2 PONRAJ Advance 200
3 VIJAYAN
4 THIRUPATHI
5 VIJAYAKUMAR
6 GOVINDAN
7 TAMILMANI
8 SELVAM
9 ANAMALAI
10 KUMARAN
How would I rewrite my query to avoid duplicates, or what would be a different way to not show duplicates?
The problem with your query is that you are using union when what you want is a join. The union is first going to list all employees with the first part:
select coluqEID as EmployeeID , colEName as EmployeeName,"" as Type, "" as Amt
from tbl_Master_Employee
and then adds to that list all employee records where they have a salary with a certain date.
Select b.coluqEID as EmployeeID, b.colEName as EmployeeName, colType as Type,
colAmount as Amt
from tbl_Emp_Salary a, tbl_Master_Employee b
where a.coluqEID = b.coluqEID and a.colDate = #12/09/2013#
Is your goal to get a list of all employees and only display salary information for those who have a certain date? Some sample data would be useful. Assuming the data here: SQL Fiddle this query should create what you want.
Select a.coluqEID as EmployeeID, colEName as EmployeeName,
b.colType as Type, b.colAmount as Amt
FROM tbl_Master_Employees as a
LEFT JOIN (select coluqEID, colType, colAmount FROM tbl_EMP_Salary
where colDate = '20130912') as b ON a.coluqEID = b.coluqEID;
The first step is to create a select that will get you just the salaries that you want by date. You can then perform a join on this as if you were performing a separate query. You use a LEFT JOIN because you want all of the records from one side, the employees, and only the records that match your criteria from the second side, your salaries.
I believe you will need a join, however as to your question on Unique names.
select **DISTINCT** coluqEID as EmployeeID
Adding the distinct operator would give only uniquely returned results.
I am trying to find records where the personID is associated to the incorrect SoundFile(String). I am trying to search for incorrect records among all personID's, not just one specific one. Here are my example tables:
TASKS-
PersonID SoundFile(String)
123 D10285.18001231234.mp3
123 D10236.18001231234.mp3
123 D10237.18001231234.mp3
123 D10212.18001231234.mp3
123 D12415.18001231234.mp3
**126 D19542.18001231234.mp3
126 D10235.18001234567.mp3
126 D19955.18001234567.mp3
RECORDINGS-
PhoneNumber(Distinct Records)
18001231234
18001234567
So in this example, I am trying to find all records like the one that I indented. The majority of the soundfiles like '%18001231234%' are associated to PersonID 123, but this one record is PersonID 126. I need to find all records where for all distinct numbers from the Recordings table, the PersonID(s) is not the majority.
Let me know if you need more information!
Thanks in advance!!
; WITH distinctRecordings AS (
SELECT DISTINCT PhoneNumber
FROM Recordings
),
PersonCounts as (
SELECT t.PersonID, dr.PhoneNumber, COUNT(*) AS num
FROM
Tasks t
JOIN distinctRecordings dr
ON t.SoundFile LIKE '%' + dr.PhoneNumber + '%'
GROUP BY t.PersonID, dr.PhoneNumber
)
SELECT t.PersonID, t.SoundFile
FROM PersonCounts pc1
JOIN PersonCounts pc2
ON pc2.PhoneNumber = pc1.PhoneNumber
AND pc2.PersonID <> pc1.PersonID
AND pc2.Num < pc1.Num
JOIN Tasks t
ON t.PersonID = pc2.PersonID
AND t.SoundFile LIKE '%' + pc2.PhoneNumber + '%'
SQL Fiddle Here
To summarize what this does... the first CTE, distinctRecordings, is just a distinct list of the Phone Numbers in Recordings.
Next, PersonCounts is a count of phone numbers associated with the records in Tasks for each PersonID.
This is then joined to itself to find any duplicates, and selects whichever duplicate has the smaller count... this is then joined back to Tasks to get the offending soundFile for that person / phone number.
(If your schema had some minor improvements made to it, this query would have been much simpler...)
here you go, receiving all pairs (PersonID, PhoneNumber) where the person has less entries with the given phone number than the person with the maximum entries. note that the query doesn't cater for multiple persons on par within a group.
select agg.pid
, agg.PhoneNumber
from (
select MAX(c) KEEP ( DENSE_RANK FIRST ORDER BY c DESC ) OVER ( PARTITION BY rt.PhoneNumber ) cmax
, rt.PhoneNumber
, rt.PersonID pid
, rt.c
from (
select r.PhoneNumber
, t.PersonID
, count(*) c
from recordings r
inner join tasks t on ( r.PhoneNumber = regexp_replace(t.SoundFile, '^[^.]+\.([^.]+)\.[^.]+$', '\1' ) )
group by r.PhoneNumber
, t.PersonID
) rt
) agg
where agg.c < agg.cmax
;
caveat: the solution is in oracle syntax though the operations should be in the current sql standard (possibly apart from regexp_replace, which might not matter too much since your sound file data seems to follow a fixed-position structure ).
I have one table things full of items listed by ItemID. Given an ItemID, I need to get the record with the ItemID and all other items with the same name.
In the sample data below, given the ItemID of 1, I need to select all records with the same name (in this case, "poptarts") as ItemID 1, including the record with ItemID 1.
ItemID = 1 name = poptarts
ItemID = 7 name = poptarts
ItemID = 8 name = cheddar
ItemID = 323 name = poptarts
select a.ItemID, a.name from things where a.ItemID = '1'
UNION
select b.ItemID, b.name from things where b.name = a.name
The SQL I've written above however does not pass a.name to the second select. Is there any way to pass the first name value to the second select? I would like for the statement to return itemid = 1 as the first row and 7 and 323 as the other rows.
UNION is only really used to concatenate two distinct sets. Based on your example, you could probably do something like this:
SELECT a.ItemID, a.Name
FROM things a
WHERE name IN (SELECT name FROM things WHERE itemID = 1)
There are lots of ways to write this kind of query and will depend on which flavor of SQL you're using but this should be more or less universal.
select
a.itemID,
a.name
from
things a
where a.name in (
select name
from things b
where b.itemID = '1'
)
SELECT this.name, this.id, that.id
FROM thing this
LEFT JOIN thing that ON that.name=this.name AND that.id <> this.id
WHERE this.id = 1
;
NOTE: this also selects the this-rows that have no twin records; in that case the that.id will be NULL. If you want to suppress the records without twin-records, remove the LEFT.
UPDATE: added the id <> id clause to suppres the obvious match.
If you really only have one table, no need to bring it in twice, UNION, or anything fancy like htat.
SELECT
name
FROM
a --assuming this is your only table
GROUP BY
itemID, name
HAVING
itemID = '1'