I have the query below and the select return the rows that I want to delete but when I ran the entire query oh boy it deleted everything from the table.
How do I change the delete to only delete the rows returned by the select after the where:
delete from StaffSecurityItems
WHERE exists (
SELECT ssi.SysSaffID
FROM StaffDeparment sd, CustomFieldValues cfv, StaffSecurityItems ssi
where cfv.SysCustomFieldID = '-9223372036854749962'
and cfv.FieldValue = 'Yes'
and sd.SysStaffRoleID =11
and cfv.SysDeparmentID = sd.SysDeparmentID
and ssi.SysSaffID = SysSaffID
and ssi.ItemName in ('EnrollNewMember','EditEnrollmentInfo')
and ssi.SysStudyID ='-9223372036854759558');
My main issues is with the delete, I need to make sure that in only deletes what is being returned by select.
If the SELECT works, why not simply replace the SELECT? What you have there is a query that will delete every row in the table StaffSecurityItems if the query within the EXISTS returns even a single row (what rows it finds is meaningless, due to a lack of a correlated query).
DELETE SD
FROM StaffDeparment sd
JOIN CustomFieldValues cfv ON cfv.SysDeparmentID = sd.SysDeparmentID
JOIN StaffSecurityItems ssi ON ssi.SysSaffID = sd.SysSaffID --guessed alias
WHERE cfv.SysCustomFieldID = '-9223372036854749962'
AND cfv.FieldValue = 'Yes'
AND sd.SysStaffRoleID =11
AND ssi.ItemName in ('EnrollNewMember','EditEnrollmentInfo')
AND ssi.SysStudyID ='-9223372036854759558'
And, as mentioned in the comments, the ANSI-92 syntax has been around for 27 years! There's no reason you shouldn't be using it: Bad habits to kick : using old-style JOINs
Related
Here is the T-SQL. The code has been around for years and it was handed to me to migrate to another SQL server. It apparently works, but I don't know why. The execution plan doesn't show any predicates being used, so how does it know which rows to exclude. If I run the subquery I get 1146 rows with the value 1
SELECT EM.PERSON_ID
FROM EMP_BEN_ELECTS EBE, EMPLOYEE_MAP EM
WHERE EBE.BW_ID = EM.BW_ID
AND CHANGE_BENEFIT_EVENT_DATE IS NULL
AND OPTION_ID <> 'WAIVE'
AND NOT EXISTS (SELECT 1 FROM EMPLOYEE_BILLING WHERE BILLING_GROUPING_ID
IN('HWMONTHLY','HWINDIVIDUALBILLED') AND END_DATE IS NULL)
I plan rewrite it without the subquery and use a left join instead, but this just boggled me that it works. The only time I seen code written like this without the join being qualified was when I seen code coming from an Oracle developer.
The subquery of NOT EXISTS is not used to return any (of the 1146) rows.
It is used to check if at least 1 row exists in the table EMPLOYEE_BILLING with the specified conditions:
BILLING_GROUPING_ID IN('HWMONTHLY','HWINDIVIDUALBILLED') AND END_DATE IS NULL
If there is such a row, then NOT EXISTS returns FALSE and since all the conditions in the WHERE clause of the main query are linked with the operator AND, then the final result is WHERE FALSE, making the query to not return any rows.
Don't rewrite the query with a LEFT join.
EXISTS and NOT EXISTS provide usually better performance than joins.
What you must change though, is that archaic join syntax with the ,.
Change it to a proper INNER join with an ON clause:
SELECT EM.PERSON_ID
FROM EMP_BEN_ELECTS EBE INNER JOIN EMPLOYEE_MAP EM
ON EBE.BW_ID = EM.BW_ID
WHERE CHANGE_BENEFIT_EVENT_DATE IS NULL
AND OPTION_ID <> 'WAIVE'
AND NOT EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM EMPLOYEE_BILLING
WHERE BILLING_GROUPING_ID IN('HWMONTHLY','HWINDIVIDUALBILLED')
AND END_DATE IS NULL
)
Also, you should qualify all the column names with the table's name/alias they belong to (CHANGE_BENEFIT_EVENT_DATE and OPTION_ID which I left unqualified because I don't know which alias to use).
I'm working in a query window in SSMS.
Using 3 tables:
WORK_ORDER wo
An order to fabricate a part
OPERATION op
An operation in the fabrication of the part (laser, grinding, plating, etc.)
PART pt
A unique record defining the part
My objective is to report on the status of an operation (say #3) (#total parts ordered, #completed parts), but additionally to include the number of parts that have completed the previous operation (#2) in the sequence and are ready for the process. My solution was to use the LAG function, which works perfectly when the nested select statement below is run independently, but I get an avg of 4X duplication in my results, and my Completed_QTY_PREV_OP column is not displayed. I am aware that's because it's not in the parent select statement, but I wanted to correct the join first. I'm guessing the two problems are related.
Footnote: The WHERE contains a filter that you can ignore. The parent select statement works perfectly without the joined subquery.
Here's my sql:
SELECT op.RESOURCE_ID, pt.USER_5 AS PRODUCT, wo.PART_ID, wo.TYPE, wo.BASE_ID,
wo.LOT_ID, wo.SPLIT_ID, wo.SUB_ID, op.SEQUENCE_NO, pt.DESCRIPTION,
wo.DESIRED_QTY, op.FULFILLED_QTY AS QTY_COMP, op.SERVICE_ID, op.DISPATCHED_QTY, wo.STATUS
FROM dbo.WORK_ORDER wo INNER JOIN
dbo.OPERATION op ON wo.TYPE = op.WORKORDER_TYPE
AND wo.BASE_ID = op.WORKORDER_BASE_ID
AND wo.LOT_ID = op.WORKORDER_LOT_ID
AND wo.SPLIT_ID = op.WORKORDER_SPLIT_ID
AND wo.SUB_ID = op.WORKORDER_SUB_ID INNER JOIN
dbo.PART pt ON wo.PART_ID = pt.ID
LEFT OUTER JOIN
--The nested select statement works by itself in a query window,
--but the JOIN throws an error.
(SELECT
pr.WORKORDER_TYPE, pr.WORKORDER_BASE_ID, pr.WORKORDER_LOT_ID,
pr.WORKORDER_SPLIT_ID, pr.WORKORDER_SUB_ID, pr.SEQUENCE_NO,
LAG (COMPLETED_QTY, 1) OVER (ORDER BY pr.WORKORDER_TYPE, pr.WORKORDER_BASE_ID,
pr.WORKORDER_LOT_ID, pr.WORKORDER_SPLIT_ID, pr.WORKORDER_SUB_ID, pr.SEQUENCE_NO) AS COMP_QTY_PREV_OP
FROM dbo.OPERATION AS pr) AS prev
--End of nested select
ON
op.WORKORDER_TYPE = prev.WORKORDER_TYPE AND
op.WORKORDER_BASE_ID = prev.WORKORDER_BASE_ID AND
op.WORKORDER_LOT_ID = prev.WORKORDER_LOT_ID AND
op.WORKORDER_SPLIT_ID = prev.WORKORDER_SPLIT_ID AND
op.WORKORDER_SUB_ID = prev.WORKORDER_SUB_ID
WHERE (NOT (op.SERVICE_ID IS NULL)) AND (wo.STATUS = N'R')
You haven't given enough information for a definitive answer, so instead I will give you an approach to debugging this.
You are getting unexpected rows as a result of a JOIN. This means that your JOIN condition is not matching the two sides of the JOIN on a one-to-one basis. There are multiple rows in the table being JOINed that meet the JOIN conditions.
To find these rows, temporarily change your SELECT list to SELECT *. Do this both in the outer SELECT, and in the derived table. Look through the columns being returned by the JOINed table, and find the values that you didn't expect to be returned.
Since the JOIN that causes the issue is the last one, they will be all the way to right of the result of a SELECT *.
Then add more conditions to the JOIN to eliminate the unwanted rows from the results.
I simplified the whole query by first creating a temp table filled by the previously nested SELECT, and then joining to it from the parent SELECT.
Works perfectly now. Thanks for looking.
PS: I apologize for the confusion about an error message. I noticed after I posted that I had an old comment in the code regarding an error. The error had been resolved before posting, but I neglected to remove the comment.
I'm testing this UPDATE statement to update all 4%, 8%, and 9% parts in our database. I'm trying to get the QTY_MULTIPLE value to match the CASES per layer value.
So, the REGEXP_LIKE, will eventually read:
> Regexp_like ( sp.part_no, '^4|^8|^9' )
It doesn't right now because I'm testing three specific parts. I want to make sure the rest of the statement works the way that it's supposed to.
Here's what I'm testing with:
UPDATE SALES_PART_TAB sp
SET sp.qty_multiple = ( SELECT cases_per_layer
FROM HH_INV_PART_CHARS
WHERE sp.part_no = HH_INV_PART_CHARS.part_no AND
sp.contract = HH_INV_PART_CHARS.contract )
WHERE Regexp_like ( sp.part_no, '^410-0017|^816-0210|^921-0003' ) AND
EXISTS
( SELECT sp.contract,
sp.part_no,
sp.qty_multiple,
HH_INV_PART_CHARS.cases_per_layer
FROM SALES_PART sp
inner join HH_INV_PART_CHARS
ON sp.part_no = HH_INV_PART_CHARS.part_no AND
sp.contract = HH_INV_PART_CHARS.contract
WHERE sp.qty_multiple != HH_INV_PART_CHARS.cases_per_layer );
When I run this statement, it updates 16 rows.
However, I'm expecting it to update 15 rows. I reached this conclusion by running the following SELECT statement:
SELECT sp.contract,
sp.catalog_no,
sp.qty_multiple,
HH_INV_PART_CHARS.cases_per_layer
FROM SALES_PART sp
inner join HH_INV_PART_CHARS
ON sp.part_no = HH_INV_PART_CHARS.part_no AND
sp.contract = HH_INV_PART_CHARS.contract
WHERE sp.qty_multiple != HH_INV_PART_CHARS.cases_per_layer AND
Regexp_like ( sp.part_no, '^410-0017|^816-0210|^921-0003' )
I think the problem I'm having is the UPDATE statement is updating all rows where the part_no and contract from the sales_part table exist on HH_INV_PART_CHARS. It's not limiting the update to part where the qty_multiple isn't equal to the cases_per_layer (which is what I want).
I'm a little stumped right now. I've been trying to work on both the subqueries but I'm not having any luck identifying where the problem is.
The Regexp_like ( sp.part_no,...) in the update query refers to SALES_PART_TAB.spart_no, while in the second query it refers to SALES_PART.spart_no.
One of the causes of the fog is that you redefine the alias sp in the same query, and so the exists subquery does not relate in any way to the record that is being updated. This means that if you would throw away the exists condition, you would still update 16 records. It seems very unlikely that this is what you want.
Use a different alias, so you can distinguish which table you want to refer to.
I have seen many answers that will update a table 1 when rows exist in table 2, but not one that works using a LEFT JOIN in selecting the rows, (for better performance). I have a solution to the update, but it will perform badly as it uses NOT IN.
So this SQL will update the tables as required, but looks to be very costly when run against large tables making it difficult to use.
update header
set status='Z'
where status='A'
and header.id not in (
select headerid
from detail
where detail.id between 0 and 9999999
);
Now I have a well performing query using a LEFT JOIN which returns the correct ids, but I have not been able to insert it into an update statement to give the same results.
The select statement is
select header.id
from header
left join detail on detail.headerid = header.id
where detail.headerid is null
and header.status='A'
So if I use this in the update statement as in:
update header
set status = 'Z'
where header.id = (
select header.id
from header
left join detail on detail.headerid = header.id
where detail.headerid is null and header.status='A'
)
Then I fail with:
ORA-01427: single-row subquery returns more than one row
I am expecting multiple header.id to be returned and want to update all these rows.
So I am still searching for a solution which will update the returned rows, using a well performing SQL select to return rows in table header, that do not have related rows in the detail table.
Any help would be appreciated, otherwise I will be left with the badly performing update.
Since you are expecting multiple header ID & the sub query returns multiple ID as you expected you should use IN
Try this
Update
header
Set status = 'Z'
Where
header.id IN (select
header.id
From
header
Left join
detail
On
detail.headerid = header.id
Where
detail.headerid is null
And
header.status='A')
I wouldn't put the condition on the outer table in the subquery. I am more comfortable writing this logic as:
update header h
set status = 'Z'
where not exists (select 1
from detail d
where d.headerid = h.id
) and
h.status = 'A';
If performance is an issue, indexes on detail(headerid) and header(status, id) and help.
typical, the next place I looked, I found an answer...
update header set status='Z' where not exists (select detail.headerid from detail where detail.headerid = header.id) and status = 'A'
Oh well, at least its here if anyone else wants to find it.
As the error states your subquery is returning more than one rows and you are using a = sign in your update query. = sign is not allowed if your query returns more than one records use either IN, NOT IN , EXISTS, NOT EXISTS as per your requirement
I am working on the query. I have two tables one is detail table where not grouping happen and its like including all the values and other table is line table which has important column grouped together from detail table.
I want to show all the column from line table and some column from detail table.
I am using below query to fetch my records
SELECT ab.*,
cd.phone_number,
cd.id
FROM xxx_line ab,
xxx_detail cd
WHERE cd.reference_number = ab.reference_number
AND cd.org_id = ab.org_id
AND cd.request_id = ab.request_id
AND ab.request_id = 13414224
INTERSECT
SELECT ab.*,
cd.phone_number,
cd.id
FROM xxx_line ab,
xxx_detail cd
WHERE cd.reference_number = ab.reference_number
AND cd.org_id = ab.org_id
AND cd.request_id = ab.request_id
AND ab.request_id = 13414224
The query is working fine...
But I want to know is there any other way for I can achieve the same result by not even using Intersect.
I purpose is to find out all possible way to get the same output.
The INTERSECT operator returns the unique set of rows returned by each query. The code can be re-written with a DISTINCT operator to make the meaning clearer:
SELECT DISTINCT
xxx_line.*,
xxx_detail.phone_number,
xxx_detail.id
FROM xxx_line
JOIN xxx_detail
ON xxx_line.reference_number = xxx_detail.reference_number
AND xxx_line.org_id = xxx_detail.org_id
AND xxx_line.request_id = xxx_detail.request_id
WHERE xxx_line.request_id = 13414224
I also replaced the old-fashioned join syntax with the newer ANSI join syntax (which makes relationships clearer by forcing the join tables and conditions to be listed close to each other) and removed the meaningless table aliases (because code complexity is more directly related to the number of variables than the number of characters).