I am using oracle sql developer and trying to pivot in based on IssueId and expecting to get one row. But it creates an extra row for null values of issue but I want all values in one row. Please, see below scenario for better explanation of this confusing problem.
Table I have after joins :
Data:
Current Result with Extra Null Row:
Expected Result:
My Query:
select *
from
(
select TableB.SEQ_ID,TableA.ISSUEID , TableC.Question
from TableC RIGHT JOIN TableB ON TableC.QUESTIONID = TableB.QUESTION_ID
LEFT JOIN TableA ON TableB.QUESTION_ID = TableA.QUESTIONID AND ISSUEID = 3250
) d
pivot
(
MAX(Question)
for SEQ_ID in ( 1, 2, 3 ,4, 5 )
) piv;
Any suggestions related to this is appreciated. Thank You!
Assuming the intermediate result set is what you expect to see and the left/right outer joins are necessary for what you're trying to do, you could just replace the null issue IDs from rows not matching in table A, using an analytic aggregate:
max(TableA.ISSUEID) over () as ISSUEID
With sample data that gets the same intermediate result you showed, the modified inner query:
select TableB.SEQ_ID, max(TableA.ISSUEID) over () as ISSUEID, TableC.Question
from TableC
RIGHT JOIN TableB ON TableC.QUESTIONID = TableB.QUESTION_ID
LEFT JOIN TableA ON TableB.QUESTION_ID = TableA.QUESTIONID AND TableA.ISSUEID = 3250;
gets
SEQ_ID ISSUEID QUESTION
---------- ---------- -------------
1 3250 How are You?
2 3250 Hows it going
3 3250 Is It Okay?
4 3250 Whats Up?
5 3250 Really?
and when pivoted:
select *
from
(
select TableB.SEQ_ID, max(TableA.ISSUEID) over () as ISSUEID, TableC.Question
from TableC
RIGHT JOIN TableB ON TableC.QUESTIONID = TableB.QUESTION_ID
LEFT JOIN TableA ON TableB.QUESTION_ID = TableA.QUESTIONID AND TableA.ISSUEID = 3250
) d
pivot
(
MAX(Question)
for SEQ_ID in ( 1, 2, 3 ,4, 5 )
) piv;
gets
ISSUEID 1 2 3 4 5
---------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
3250 How are You? Hows it going Is It Okay? Whats Up? Really?
You could get the same result with:
select * from (
select b.seq_id, a.issueid, c.question
from tableb b
join tablec c on c.questionid = b.question_id
cross join (
select issueid from tablea where issueid = 3250
) a
) d
pivot
(
max(question)
for seq_id in (1, 2, 3 ,4, 5)
);
(or cross apply in 12c+), which also works with condition >= 3250. This just lists all five questions against every matching issue ID. That may not actually be what you want to do, but it's what your very limited sample data and expected results suggest.
If you only want valid issues, then don't mess around with all those outer joins. Just start with the table that has the rows you want to keep, us left join for the other tables, and filter the first table in the where clause:
from (select TableB.SEQ_ID, TableA.ISSUEID , TableC.Question
from TableA LEFT JOIN
TableB
on TableB.QUESTION_ID = TableA.QUESTIONID LEFT JOIN
TableC
on TableC.QUESTIONID = TableB.QUESTION_ID
where tableA.ISSUEID = 3250
) d
Related
I am attempting to make a complex SQL join on several tables: as shown below. I have included an image of the dB schema also.
Consider table_1 -
e_id name
1 a
2 b
3 c
4 d
and table_2 -
e_id date
1 1/1/2019
1 1/1/2020
2 2/1/2019
4 2/1/2019
The issue here is performance. From the tables 2 - 4 we only want the most recent entry for a given e_id but because these tables contain historical data (~ >3.5M rows) it's quite slow. I've attached an example of how we're currently trying to achieve this but it only includes one join of 'table_1' with 'table_x'. We group by e_id and get the max date for it. The other way we've thought about doing this is creating a Materialized View and pulling data from that and refreshing it after some period of time. Any improvements welcome.
from fds.region as rg
inner join (
select e_id, name, p_id
from fds.table_1
where sec_type = 'S' AND active_flag = 1
) as table_1 on table_1.e_id = rg.e_id
inner join fds.table_2 table_2 on table_2.e_id = rg.e_id
inner join fds.sec sec on sec.p_id = table_1.p_id
inner join fds.entity ent on ent.int_entity_id = sec.int_entity_id
inner join (
SELECT int_1.e_id, int_1.date, int_1.int_price
FROM fds.table_4 int_1
INNER JOIN (
SELECT e_id, MAX(date) date
FROM fds.table_2
GROUP BY e_id
) int_2 ON int_1.e_id = int_2.fsym_id AND int_1.date = int_2.date
) as table_4 on table_4.e_id = rg.e_id
where rg.region_str like '%US' and ent.sec_type = 'P'
order by table_2.int_price
limit 500;
You can simplify this logic:
(
SELECT int_1.e_id, int_1.date, int_1.int_price
FROM fds.table_4 int_1
INNER JOIN (
SELECT e_id, MAX(date) date
FROM fds.table_2
GROUP BY e_id
) int_2 ON int_1.e_id = int_2.fsym_id AND int_1.date = int_2.date
) as table_4
To:
(SELECT DISTINCT ON (int_1.e_id) int_1.*
FROM fds.table_4 int_1
ORDER BY int_1.e_id, int_1.date DESC
) table_4
This can take advantage of an index on fds.table_4(e_id, date desc) -- and might be wicked fast with such an index.
You also want appropriate indexes for the joins and filtering. However, it is hard to be more specific without an execution plan.
I have the following tables:
TABLE PLAYER
id | name
1 | A
2 | B
3 | C
4 | D
TABLE PAIRINGS
id | player_a | player_b
1 | 3 |1
2 | 2 |4
Both columns in table Pairings are foreign keys to column id of table player.
My problem is, I would like to avoid making a query from code every time I want to know which is my player's name (like, Select name From Player Where Id = pairings.player_a). I have thought about adding Name as an extra columnd to Pairings table, but that would denormalize it.
Instead, it would be nice if I could get the names in just one query, like:
RESULT
player_a | player_b
C | A
B | D
Is it this possible? Thanks so much in advance.
You may join the PAIRINGS table to the PLAYER table, twice:
SELECT
p1.name AS player_a,
p2.name AS player_b
FROM PAIRINGS pr
INNER JOIN PLAYER p1
ON pr.player_a = p1.id
INNER JOIN PLAYER p2
ON pr.player_b = p2.id;
Demo
Don't do it! One of the points of using a relational database is that data is stored in only one place. That is a big convenience. Of course, there are exceptions, but these exceptions should have firm reasons.
In this case, just define a view:
CREATE VIEW vw_pairings AS
SELECT p.*, pa.name AS player_a_name,
pb.name AS player_b_name
FROM PAIRINGS p JOIN
PLAYER pa
ON p.player_a = pa.id JOIN
PLAYER pb
ON p.player_b = pb.id;
When you query from the view, you will see the names, along with all the other information in the PAIRINGS table.
Hope can help you
Select * Into #PLAYER From (
Select 1 [ID], 'A' [Name] Union All
Select 2 [ID], 'B' [Name] Union All
Select 3 [ID], 'C' [Name] Union All
Select 4 [ID], 'D' [Name]
) A
Select * Into #PAIRINGS From (
Select 1 [ID], 3 [PLAYER_A], 1 [PLAYER_B] Union All
Select 2 [ID], 2 [PLAYER_A], 4 [PLAYER_B]
) A
Select
P.ID, A.NAME, B.NAME
From #PAIRINGS P
Left Join #PLAYER A On A.ID = P.PLAYER_A
Left Join #PLAYER B On B.ID = P.PLAYER_B
You can create view, for avoid making query
Example
Create View vwPAIRINGS As
Select
P.ID, A.NAME, B.NAME
From #PAIRINGS P
Left Join #PLAYER A On A.ID = P.PLAYER_A
Left Join #PLAYER B On B.ID = P.PLAYER_B
After that, just select usual
Select * from vwPAIRINGS
If I have the following sample table (order by ID)
ID Date Type
-- ---- ----
1 01/01/2000 A
2 22/04/1995 A
2 14/02/2001 B
Where you can immediate see that ID=1 does not have a Type=B, but ID=2 does. What I want to do, if fill in a line to show this:
ID Date Type
-- ---- ----
1 01/01/2000 A
1 NULL B
2 22/04/1995 A
2 14/02/2001 B
where there could potentially be 100's of different types, (so may need to end up inserting 100's rows per person if they lack 100's Types!)
Is there a general solution to do this?
Could I possibly outer join the table on itself and do it that way?
You can do this with a cross join to generate all the rows and a left join to get the actual data values:
select i.id, s.date, t.type
from (select distinct id from sample) i cross join
(select distinct type from sample) t left join
sample s
on s.id = i.id and
s.type = t.type;
I've got a SQL-statement with a - for me not explainable - strange behaviour.
Perhaps you could find what's wrong:
When I use the statement
select count(*) from department
I got 2755 results
Using the following statement
select
building1.street, building1.streetno, building1.plz, building1.city, dept1.buildingid
from
department dept1
left join
supporter sup
on
dept.supporterid = sup.id
left join
building building1
on
sup.buildingid = building1.ibuildingid
where
dept.usepostaladresssupporter = 1
union all
select
building2.street, building2.streetno, building2.plz, building2.city, dept2.buildingid
from
building building2
right join
tueks_department dept2
on
dept2.buildingid = building2.ibuildingid
where
dept2.usepostaladresssupporter = 0
I got 2755 results too.
But when I want to combine the two statements with a left join:
select count(*) from department
left join
(
select
building1.street, building1.streetno, building1.plz, building1.city, dept1.buildingid
from
department dept1
left join
supporter sup
on
dept.supporterid = sup.id
left join
building building1
on
sup.buildingid = building1.ibuildingid
where
dept.usepostaladresssupporter = 1
union all
select
building2.street, building2.streetno, building2.plz, building2.city, dept2.buildingid
from
building building2
right join
tueks_department dept2
on
dept2.buildingid = building2.ibuildingid
where
dept2.usepostaladresssupporter = 0
) postadress
on
department.buildingid = postadress.buildingid;
I got 3648513 results.
My expectation was, that I get only 2755 results.
Where's the mistake?
Thanks for help!
I assume that buildingid is not unique (for my reasoning to hold true, it can't be unique)
Imagine following simple tables
TableA
create TableA (name VARCHAR(32));
insert into TableA values ('Lieven');
insert into TableA values ('Lieven');
TableB
create TableB (name VARCHAR(32));
insert into TableB values ('Lieven');
insert into TableB values ('Lieven');
insert into TableB values ('AnyOtherValue');
Select statement
select * from TableA a left outer join TableB b on a.name = b.name
As each record of TableA is matched with each record of TableB where the name is equal, this will result in 4 records (the AnyOtherValue is dissmissed as it doesn't match)
The first record of TableA is returned with two of three records of `TableB'
The second record of TableA is returned with two of three records of `TableB'
The query
select
building1.street, building1.streetno, building1.plz, building1.city, dept1.buildingid
from
department dept1
left join
supporter sup
on
dept.supporterid = sup.id
left join
building building1
on
sup.buildingid = building1.ibuildingid
where
dept.usepostaladresssupporter = 1
union all
select
building2.street, building2.streetno, building2.plz, building2.city, dept2.buildingid
from
building building2
right join
tueks_department dept2
on
dept2.buildingid = building2.ibuildingid
where
dept2.usepostaladresssupporter = 0
will return one row per department that has usepostaladresssupporter as either 0 or 1 (note that records with other values will not be included, this may or may not be a problem depending on the constrainst of this column).
The unique key of this query results is probably something like departmentid (you will need to include that column in your select criteria).
So the correct query should look something like this:
select * from department
left join
(
select
building1.street, building1.streetno, building1.plz, building1.city, dept1.departmentid
from
department dept1
left join
supporter sup
on
dept.supporterid = sup.id
left join
building building1
on
sup.buildingid = building1.ibuildingid
where
dept.usepostaladresssupporter = 1
union all
select
building2.street, building2.streetno, building2.plz, building2.city, dept2.departmentid
from
building building2
right join
tueks_department dept2
on
dept2.buildingid = building2.ibuildingid
where
dept2.usepostaladresssupporter = 0
) postadress
on
department.departmentid = postadress.departmentid;
Your query will go wrong on data something like this:
Departmentid BuildingId Name
1 1 Dept1
2 2 Dept2
3 2 Dept3
The multiplying effect is not quite equal to deptcount * deptcount, but rather it is buildingcount * buildingcount + deptcount - buildingcount
I am trying to get a single result (PHONE) per match (CONTACT_ID) in a Left Outer Join. I imagine that there is a way to accomplish this with the preference (or order) being set by another column/field- the phone type (TYPE), but I haven't been able to figure it out. Below is a list of facts to help better explain what I am trying to accomplish and then following is an example Table A and B with the desired result. I've looked at min() and group by, but I don't know how to make those work here. As a side note, after this is working, I will be joining it to more tables to the left of it in a simpler fashion.
The student can have an unlimited number of CONTACT_ID.
A contact does not always have all phone types.
The preferred order of phone types (TYPE) is C,H,W (which, fortunately, happens to be alphabetical)
ignore match and go to the next in priority if PHONE is null
TableA:
STUDENT_ID CONTACT_ID
---------- ----------
X 1
X 2
Y 3
Y 4
TableB:
CONTACT_ID TYPE PHONE
---------- ---- -----
1 H 21
1 C
1 W 44
2 H 78
2 C 92
2 W 11
Desired Result:
STUDENT_ID CONTACT_ID TYPE PHONE
---------- ---------- ---- -----
X 1 H 21
X 2 C 92
Y 3
Y 4
Here is the query that I have that will make a join with all phone matches (minus all of my crazy attempts at getting what I want).
SELECT *
FROM Table TableA T1
LEFT OUTER JOIN TableB T2 ON T1.CONTACT_ID = T2.CONTACT_ID
All help greatly appreciated!
Edited code from Stefan Onofrei's solution:
(results in some duplicate entries)
SELECT
T1.STUDENT_ID,
T1.CONTACT_ID,
T2.PHONE_TYPE,
T3.PHONE
FROM REG_STU_CONTACT T1
INNER JOIN
(SELECT MIN(PHONE_TYPE) AS PHONE_TYPE, CONTACT_ID
FROM REG_CONTACT_PHONE
WHERE PHONE IS NOT NULL
GROUP BY CONTACT_ID) T2 ON T1.CONTACT_ID = T2.CONTACT_ID
INNER JOIN REG_CONTACT_PHONE T3 ON T2.CONTACT_ID = T3.CONTACT_ID AND T2.PHONE_TYPE = T3.PHONE_TYPE
ORDER BY T1.STUDENT_ID
Select A.STUDENT_ID A.CONTACT_ID B.TYPE c.PHONE
from TableA A
inner join
(select MIN(type ) as type, Contact_ID
from Tableb
where phone is not null
group by contactid) B
on A.contactid = b.contactid
inner join Tableb C
on B.contactid = c.conatctid and b.type = c.type