I have this report and need to add totals for each person (the red circle)
existing report
new report
I cannot change the existing report so I export data from MS SQL to MS Access and create a new report there. I got it working for one employee but have trouble with a query which would for multiple employees.
This query extract data use as input:
SELECT [TIME].[RCD_NUM], [TIME].[EMP_ID], [TIME].[PPERIOD], [TIME].[PRUN], [TIME].[TDATE], [TIME].[PC], [TIME].[RATE], [TIME].[HOURS], [TIME].[AMOUNT], [TIME].[JOB_ID], [TIME].[UPDATED], [TIME].[UPDATED_BY], [TIME].[LOG_DATE], [TIME].[ORIGINAL_REC_NUM]
FROM [TIME]
WHERE ((([TIME].[EMP_ID])=376) And (([TIME].[TDATE])<=#12/31/2006# And ([TIME].[TDATE])>=#1/1/2006#) And (([TIME].[PC])<599));
this query populates the report:
SELECT *
FROM TIME1
WHERE RCD_NUM = (SELECT Max(RCD_NUM) FROM [TIME1] UQ WHERE UQ.PPERIOD = [TIME1].PPERIOD AND UQ.PC = [TIME1].PC);
the problem is if I remove EMP_ID from the first query like this
SELECT [TIME].[RCD_NUM], [TIME].[EMP_ID], [TIME].[PPERIOD], [TIME].[PRUN], [TIME].[TDATE], [TIME].[PC], [TIME].[RATE], [TIME].[HOURS], [TIME].[AMOUNT], [TIME].[JOB_ID], [TIME].[UPDATED], [TIME].[UPDATED_BY], [TIME].[LOG_DATE], [TIME].[ORIGINAL_REC_NUM]
FROM [TIME]
WHERE ((([TIME].[TDATE])<=#12/31/2006# And ([TIME].[TDATE])>=#1/1/2006#) And (([TIME].[PC])<599));
then the second query doesn't work and ms access freezes when running this query.
any help/idea please?
Caveat: I won't pretend to know the precise cause of the problem, but I have had to repeatedly refactor queries in Access to get them working even though the original SQL statements are completely valid in regards to syntax and logic. Sometimes I've had to convolute a sequence of queries just to avoid bugs in Access. Access is often rather dumb and will simply (re)execute queries and subqueries exactly as given without optimization. At other times Access will attempt to combine queries by performing some internal optimizations, but sometimes those introduce frustrating bugs. Something as simple as a name change or column reordering can be the difference between a functioning query and one that crashes or freezes Access.
First consider:
Can you leave the data on SQL Server and link to the results in Access (rather than export/importing it into Access)? Even if you need or prefer to use Access for creating the actual report, you could use all the power of SQL Server for querying the data--it is likely less buggy and more efficient.
Common best practice is to create SQL Server stored procedures that return just what data you need in Access. A pass-through query is created in Access to retrieve the data, but all data operations are performed on the server.
Perhaps this is just a performance issue where limiting the set by [EMP_ID] selects a small subset, but the full table is large enough to "freeze" Access.
How long have you let Access remain frozen before killing the process? Be patient... like many, many minutes (or hours). Start it in the morning and check after lunch. :) It might eventually return a result set. This does not imply it is tolerable or that there is no other solution, but it can be useful to know if it eventually returns data or not.
How many possible records are there?
Are the imported data properly indexed? Add indexes to all key fields and those which are used in WHERE clauses.
Is the database located on a network share or is it local? Try copying the database to a local drive.
Other hints:
Try the BETWEEN operator for dates in the WHERE clause.
Try refactoring the "second" query by performing a join in the FROM clause rather than the WHERE clause. In doing this, you may also want to save the subquery as a named query (just as [TIME1] is saved). Whether or not a query is saved or embedded in another statement CAN change the behavior of Access (see caveat) even though the results should be identical.
Here's a version with the embedded aggregate query. Notice how all column references are qualified with the source. Some of the original query's columns do not have a source alias prefixing the column name. Remember the caveat... such picky details can affect Access behavior.:
SELECT TIME1.*
FROM TIME1 INNER JOIN
(SELECT UQ.PPERIOD, UQ.PC, Max(UQ.RCD_NUM) As Max_RCD_NUM
FROM [TIME1] UQ
GROUP BY UQ.PPERIOD, UQ.PC) As TIMEAGG
ON (TIME1.PPERIOD = TIMEAGG.PPERIOD) And (TIME1.PC = TIMEAGG.PC)
AND (TIME1.RCD_NUM = TIMEAGG.Max_RCD_NUM)
Related
In Jasper Reports, how do I use a SQL result in the title block and use it for subreporting?
I have previously successfully used a SQL result in the title block when there is only one result, and am not depending on it to spawn multiple subreport sections. In this instance I would like to do both use the SQL result and have multiple subreports.
My current simplified query (Oracle SQL)
SELECT DISTINCT
LOC."NAME" AS LOCATION,
coalesce($P{input_date},($P!{default_date})) as ACTUAL_TIME
FROM
"CF"."LOCATION" LOC
WHERE
(LOWER(LOC."NAME") LIKE '%'||LOWER($P{input_location})||'%')
There are three locations, and each generates two subreports grouped by location.
default_date is defined as the result of an oracle function
"SELECT START_TIME FROM CF.LAST_OPERATIONAL_DAY"
Operational days do not run 24 hours, from midnight to midnight.
1) I have been using this default_date technique with most of the reports, hopefully easing maintainability. However, evaluating the actual-time 3 times could cause the reports to run for different days if run at the wrong moment.
2) If I put $F{ACTUAL_TIME} in my Title, it shows as null. (In our simpler reports, the primary query returns one value, and this field is usable in the Title.)
3) My searching has lead me to believe that subqueries are not permitted without a list, table, or subreport.
There is the possibility of reimplementing the Oracle function in Java to set a new parameter. If input_date is null, use the new variable, but I fear the maintenance headache as we proceed.
There is the possibility of creating another layer of sub-subreport. That would make the few most complicated reports more complicated.
Is there a simpler option? Can queries be done at the parameter level? In the header? Is there some setting I'm missing?
---We are using Jasper Server 6.1.1 and Jaspersoft Studio 6.1.1 and have the flexibility to upgrade if necessary. The database is Oracle 12c.
I frequently do a static analysis of SQL databases, during which I have the luxury of nobody being able to change the data except me.
However, I have not found a way to 'tell' this to SQL in order to prevent running the same query multiple times.
Here is what I would like to do, first I start with a complicated query that has a very small output.
SELECT * FROM MYTABLE WHERE MYPROPERTY = 1234
Then I run a simple query from the same window (Mostly using SQL server studio if that is relevant)
SELECT 1
Now I suddenly realize that I forgot to save the results from my first complicated (slow) query.
As I know the underlying data did not change (or even if it did) I would like to look one step back and simply get the result. However at the moment I don't know any trick to do this and I have to run the entire query again.
So the question summary is: How can I (automatically store/)get the results from recently executed queries.
I am particulary interested in simple select queries, and would be happy to allocate say 100MB memory for automated result storage. Would prefer a solution that works in SQL server studio with T-SQL, but other SQL solutions are also welcome.
EDIT: I am not looking for a way to manually prevent this from happening. In the cases where I can anticipate the problem it will not happen.
This can't be done in Microsoft SQL Server. SQL Server does not cache results, instead it caches data pages that were accessed by your query. This should make your query go a lot faster the second time around so it won't be as painful to re-run it.
In other databases, such as Oracle and MySQL, they do have a query caching mechanism that will allow you to retrieve the results directly the second time around.
I run into this frequently, I often just throw the results of longer-running queries into a temp table:
SELECT *
INTO #results1
FROM MYTABLE WHERE MYPROPERTY = 1234
SELECT *
FROM #results1
If the query is very long-running I might use a 'real' table. It's a good way to save on re-run time.
Downside is that it adds to your query.
You can also send query results to a file in SSMS, info on formatting the output is here: SSMS Results to File
The easiest way to do this is to run each query in its own SSMS window, the results will stay there until you close it, or run out of memory - besides that, I am not sure there is a way to accomplish what you want.
Once you close the SSMS window, I don't believe there is a way to get back 'cached' results.
This isn't a technical answer to your question. Having written queries and looking at results for many years, I am in the habit of saving the results in Excel, regardless of the database/query tool I'm using.
The format in Excel is rather methodical:
Each worksheet has the date. (Called something like "1 Jul".)
Each spreadsheet contains one month. (Typically with the month name like "work-201307".)
In the "B" column I copy and paste the query.
Underneath, in the "C" column, I copy and paste the results.
The next query starts a few lines after, one after the other.
I put the queries in the "B" column, so I can go to the "A" column and use to get to the first row. I put the results in the "C" column, so I can go to the "B" column and use to move between queries.
I mostly do this so I can go back and see the work I did many months ago. For instance, someone sends an email from February and says "do this again". I can go back to the February spreadsheet, go to the day it was created, and see what I was doing at that time.
In your question, though, I realize that I now instinctively solve this problem, because the "right click on the grid, copy with column headers, alt-tab to excel, alt-V" is a behavior that I comes quite naturally.
I was going to suggest you to run each query into a script with a counter (stored in a table) increased each time the query is executed (i.e. i++) and storing each query in a Temp Table called "tmpTable" + i, but it sounds very complicated to manage. Am I right?
Then I googled and I've found this Tool Pack: I didn't try it but you could take a look:
http://www.ssmstoolspack.com/Features
Hope it helps.
EDIT: added the folliwing link. There's the option to output as XML file and they mention SQL Server Integration Services as a possible solution too.
http://michaeljswart.com/2012/03/sending-query-results-to-others/#method5
SECOND EDIT: There's this DBMS-Independent tool too, it sounds interesting:
http://www.sql-workbench.net/
i am not sure this is what you want. Anyway check my answer
In sql server management studio you can open multiple tabs for executing queries. Open new tab for each query, then the result of executed queries will be available under that tab.
After executing one query in a tab dont use that tab for new query, open new tab for that job.
Have you considered using some kind of offline SQL client such as Excel? Specifically, Excel will retrieve the results into the spread sheet (using the Data ribbon/menus) where they are stored pretty much permanently as results. It will prompt you to refresh when necessary or you can do it on demand.
Your question as to whether it can be done in T/SQL or other databases depends on the database and results cache and even then they are options that the query processor can use not guarantees to the individual query.
In our app people have 1 or multiple projects. These projects have a start and an end date. People have a limited amount of available days.
Now we have a page that displays the availability of a given person on a week by week basis. It currently shows 18 weeks.
The way we currently calculate the available time for a given week is like this:
def days_available(query_date=Date.today)
days_engaged = projects.current.where("start_date < ? AND finish_date > ?", query_date, query_date).sum(:days_on_project)
available = days_total - hours_engaged
end
This means that to display the page descibed above the app will fire 18(!) queries into the database. We have pages that lists the availability of multiple people in a table. For these pages the amount of queries is quickly becomes staggering.
It is also quite slow.
How could we handle the availability retrieval in a more performant manner?
This is quite a common scenario when working with date ranges in an entity. Easy and fastest way is in SQL:
Join your events to a number generated date table (see generate days from date range) so that you have a row for each day a person or people are occupied. Once you have the data in this form it is simply a matter of grouping by the week date part of the date and counting the rows per grouping.
You can extend this to group by person for multiple person queries.
From a SQL point of view, I'd advise using a stored procedure and pass in your date/range requirement, you can then return a recordset for a user or possibly multiple users. This way your code just has to access db once.
You can then output recordset data in one go, by iterating through.
Hope this helps.
USE Stored procedure to fire your query to SQL to get data.
Pass paramerts in your case it is today's date to the SQl query.
Apply your conditions and Logic in the SQL Stored procedure , Using procedure is the goood and fastest way to retrieve data from the SQL , also it will prevent your code from the SQL injection too.
Call that SP from your Code as i dont know the Ruby on raisl I cant provide you steps about how to Call the Stored procedure from it.
After that the data fdetched as per you stored procedure will be available in Data table or something like that.
After getting the data you can perform all you need
Hope this helps
see what query is executed. further you may make comand explain to your query
explain select * from project where start_date < any_date and end_date> any_date2
you see the plan of query . Use this plan to optimized your query.
for example :
if you have index using field end_date replace a condition(end_date> any_date2 and start_date < any_date) . this step will using index if you have index on this field. But it step is db dependent . example is for nysql. if you want use index in mysql you must have using index condition on left part of where
There's not really enough information in your question to know exactly what you're trying to achieve here, e.g. the code snippet doesn't make use of the returned database query, so you could just remove it to make it faster. Perhaps this is just a bug in the code you posted?
Having said that, there are some techniques you should look into to implement your functionality.
I would take a look at using data warehouse techniques. I would think of your 'availability information' as a Fact table in a star schema, with 'Dates' and 'People' as Dimension tables.
You can then use queries to get stuff like - list of users for this projects for this week, and their availability.
Data warehousing has a whole bunch of resources you can tap into to help make this perform well, but there's also a lot of terminology that can be confusing, but for this type of 'I need to slice and dice my data across several sets of things (people and time)', Data Warehousing techniques can be quite powerful.
As I dont understand ruby on rails,from sql point of view i suggest you to write a stored procedure and return a dataset.And do the necessary table operations on the dataset from front end.It will reduce the unnecessary calls to DB.
I saw a query run in a log file on an application. and it contained a query like:
SELECT ID FROM CUST_ATTR49 WHERE 1=0
what is the use of such a query that is bound to return nothing?
A query like this can be used to ping the database. The clause:
WHERE 1=0
Ensures that non data is sent back, so no CPU charge, no Network traffic or other resource consumption.
A query like that can test for:
server availability
CUST_ATTR49 table existence
ID column existence
Keeping a connection alive
Cause a trigger to fire without changing any rows (with the where clause, but not in a select query)
manage many OR conditions in dynamic queries (e.g WHERE 1=0 OR <condition>)
This may be also used to extract the table schema from a table without extracting any data inside that table. As Andrea Colleoni said those will be the other benefits of using this.
A usecase I can think of: you have a filter form where you don't want to have any search results. If you specify some filter, they get added to the where clause.
Or it's usually used if you have to create a sql query by hand. E.g. you don't want to check whether the where clause is empty or not..and you can just add stuff like this:
where := "WHERE 0=1"
if X then where := where + " OR ... "
if Y then where := where + " OR ... "
(if you connect the clauses with OR you need 0=1, if you have AND you have 1=1)
As an answer - but also as further clarification to what #AndreaColleoni already mentioned:
manage many OR conditions in dynamic queries (e.g WHERE 1=0 OR <condition>)
Purpose as an on/off switch
I am using this as a switch (on/off) statement for portions of my Query.
If I were to use
WHERE 1=1
AND (0=? OR first_name = ?)
AND (0=? OR last_name = ?)
Then I can use the first bind variable (?) to turn on or off the first_name search criterium. , and the third bind variable (?) to turn on or off the last_name criterium.
I have also added a literal 1=1 just for esthetics so the text of the query aligns nicely.
For just those two criteria, it does not appear that helpful, as one might thing it is just easier to do the same by dynamically building your WHERE condition by either putting only first_name or last_name, or both, or none. So your code will have to dynamically build 4 versions of the same query. Imagine what would happen if you have 10 different criteria to consider, then how many combinations of the same query will you have to manage then?
Compile Time Optimization
I also might add that adding in the 0=? as a bind variable switch will not work very well if all your criteria are indexed. The run time optimizer that will select appropriate indexes and execution plans, might just not see the cost benefit of using the index in those slightly more complex predicates. Hence I usally advice, to inject the 0 / 1 explicitly into your query (string concatenating it in in your sql, or doing some search/replace). Doing so will give the compiler the chance to optimize out redundant statements, and give the Runtime Executer a much simpler query to look at.
(0=1 OR cond = ?) --> (cond = ?)
(0=0 OR cond = ?) --> Always True (ignore predicate)
In the second statement above the compiler knows that it never has to even consider the second part of the condition (cond = ?), and it will simply remove the entire predicate. If it were a bind variable, the compiler could never have accomplished this.
Because you are simply, and forcedly, injecting a 0/1, there is zero chance of SQL injections.
In my SQL's, as one approach, I typically place my sql injection points as ${literal_name}, and I then simply search/replace using a regex any ${...} occurrence with the appropriate literal, before I even let the compiler have a stab at it. This basically leads to a query stored as follows:
WHERE 1=1
AND (0=${cond1_enabled} OR cond1 = ?)
AND (0=${cond2_enabled} OR cond2 = ?)
Looks good, easily understood, the compiler handles it well, and the Runtime Cost Based Optimizer understands it better and will have a higher likelihood of selecting the right index.
I take special care in what I inject. Prime way for passing variables is and remains bind variables for all the obvious reasons.
This is very good in metadata fetching and makes thing generic.
Many DBs have optimizer so they will not actually execute it but its still a valid SQL statement and should execute on all DBs.
This will not fetch any result, but you know column names are valid, data types etc. If it does not execute you know something is wrong with DB(not up etc.)
So many generic programs execute this dummy statement for testing and fetching metadata.
Some systems use scripts and can dynamically set selected records to be hidden from a full list; so a false condition needs to be passed to the SQL. For example, three records out of 500 may be marked as Privacy for medical reasons and should not be visible to everyone. A dynamic query will control the 500 records are visible to those in HR, while 497 are visible to managers. A value would be passed to the SQL clause that is conditionally set, i.e. ' WHERE 1=1 ' or ' WHERE 1=0 ', depending who is logged into the system.
quoted from Greg
If the list of conditions is not known at compile time and is instead
built at run time, you don't have to worry about whether you have one
or more than one condition. You can generate them all like:
and
and concatenate them all together. With the 1=1 at the start, the
initial and has something to associate with.
I've never seen this used for any kind of injection protection, as you
say it doesn't seem like it would help much. I have seen it used as an
implementation convenience. The SQL query engine will end up ignoring
the 1=1 so it should have no performance impact.
Why would someone use WHERE 1=1 AND <conditions> in a SQL clause?
If the user intends to only append records, then the fastest method is open the recordset without returning any existing records.
It can be useful when only table metadata is desired in an application. For example, if you are writing a JDBC application and want to get the column display size of columns in the table.
Pasting a code snippet here
String query = "SELECT * from <Table_name> where 1=0";
PreparedStatement stmt = connection.prepareStatement(query);
ResultSet rs = stmt.executeQuery();
ResultSetMetaData rsMD = rs.getMetaData();
int columnCount = rsMD.getColumnCount();
for(int i=0;i<columnCount;i++) {
System.out.println("Column display size is: " + rsMD.getColumnDisplaySize(i+1));
}
Here having a query like "select * from table" can cause performance issues if you are dealing with huge data because it will try to fetch all the records from the table. Instead if you provide a query like "select * from table where 1=0" then it will fetch only table metadata and not the records so it will be efficient.
Per user milso in another thread, another purpose for "WHERE 1=0":
CREATE TABLE New_table_name as select * FROM Old_table_name WHERE 1 =
2;
this will create a new table with same schema as old table. (Very
handy if you want to load some data for compares)
An example of using a where condition of 1=0 is found in the Northwind 2007 database. On the main page the New Customer Order and New Purchase Order command buttons use embedded macros with the Where Condition set to 1=0. This opens the form with a filter that forces the sub-form to display only records related to the parent form. This can be verified by opening either of those forms from the tree without using the macro. When opened this way all records are displayed by the sub-form.
In ActiveRecord ORM, part of RubyOnRails:
Post.where(category_id: []).to_sql
# => SELECT * FROM posts WHERE 1=0
This is presumably because the following is invalid (at least in Postgres):
select id FROM bookings WHERE office_id IN ()
It seems like, that someone is trying to hack your database. It looks like someone tried mysql injection. You can read more about it here: Mysql Injection
We're currently investigating the load against our SQL server and looking at ways to alleviate it. During my post-secondary education, I was always told that, from a performance standpoint, it was cheaper to make SQL Server do the work. But is this true?
Here's an example:
SELECT ord_no FROM oelinhst_sql
This returns 783119 records in 14 seconds. The field is a char(8), but all of our order numbers are six-digits long so each has two blank characters leading. We typically trim this field, so I ran the following test:
SELECT LTRIM(ord_no) FROM oelinhst_sql
This returned the 783119 records in 13 seconds. I also tried one more test:
SELECT LTRIM(RTRIM(ord_no)) FROM oelinhst_sql
There is nothing to trim on the right, but I was trying to see if there was any overhead in the mere act of calling the function, but it still returned in 13 seconds.
My manager was talking about moving things like string trimming out of the SQL and into the source code, but the test results suggest otherwise. My manager also says he heard somewhere that using SQL functions meant that indexes would not be used. Is there any truth to this either?
Only optimize code that you have proven to be the slowest part of your system. Your data so far indicates that SQL string manipulation functions are not effecting performance at all. take this data to your manager.
If you use a function or type cast in the WHERE clause it can often prevent the SQL server from using indexes. This does not apply to transforming returned columns with functions.
It's typically user defined functions (UDFs) that get a bad rap with regards to SQL performance and might be the source of the advice you're getting.
The reason for this is you can build some pretty hairy functions that cause massive overhead with exponential effect.
As you've found with rtrim and ltrim this isn't a blanket reason to stop using all functions on the sql side.
It somewhat depends on what all is encompassed by: "things like string trimming", but, for string trimming at least, I'd definitely let the database do that (there will be less network traffic as well). As for the indexes, they will still be used if you're where clause is just using the column itself (as opposed to a function of the column). Use of the indexes won't be affected whatsoever by using functions on the actual columns you're retrieving (just on how you're selecting the rows).
You may want to have a look at this for performance improvement suggestions: http://net.tutsplus.com/tutorials/other/top-20-mysql-best-practices/
As I said in my comment, reduce the data read per query and you will get a speed increase.
You said:
our order numbers are six-digits long
so each has two blank characters
leading
Makes me think you are storing numbers in a string, if so why are you not using a numeric data type? The smallest numeric type which will take 6 digits is an INT (I'm assuming SQL Server) and that already saves you 4 bytes per order number, over the number of rows you mention that's quite a lot less data to read off disk and send over the network.
Fully optimise your database before looking to deal with the data outside of it; it's what a database server is designed to do, serve data.
As you found it often pays to measure but I what I think your manager may have been referring to is somthing like this.
This is typically much faster
SELECT SomeFields FROM oelinhst_sql
WHERE
datetimeField > '1/1/2011'
and
datetimeField < '2/1/2011'
than this
SELECT SomeFields FROM oelinhst_sql
WHERE
Month(datetimeField) = 1
and
year(datetimeField) = 2011
even though the rows that are returned are the same