I need perform a simple subtraction on a column and insert the new value into a new table.column.
The table are structured as such, logic is not a column it is what I want to do mathematically just for time not the date, dropping it is fine as well but the date and time are in the same cell stuck together:
Table A
A Time (Logic)
1 aaa YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS (row2 - row1)
2 aaa YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS (row3-row2)
3 aaa YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS (row4-row3)
Table B
A new_time
1 aaa insert logic row 1
2 aaa insert logic row 2
3 aaa insert logic row 3
Question is how do I subtract each row for tableA.time from the next row and UPDATE that value into tableB.new_time?
-----EDIT----
#klin
this is my script modeled after yours:
update tableB
set new_time = tableA.time
from (
select tableA.A- lead(tableA.A) over (order by tableB.B)
from tableA
) tableA.A
where tableB.a = tableA.A
Error Message:
SQL Error [500310] [42P10]: [Amazon](500310) Invalid operation: subquery in FROM may not refer to other relations of same query level;
You can use a subquery as a data source in update. Example:
create table table_a (id int primary key, t timestamp);
insert into table_a values
(1, '2016-09-01'), (2, '2016-09-02'), (3, '2016-09-04');
create table table_b (id int primary key, i interval);
insert into table_b values
(1, null), (2, null), (3, null);
update table_b b
set i = a.i
from (
select id, t - lead(t) over (order by id) i
from table_a
) a
where b.id = a.id;
select * from table_b;
id | i
----+---------
1 | -1 days
2 | -2 days
3 |
(3 rows)
One-letter aliases are handy but sometimes not quite clear. The same query with more informative aliases:
update table_b as alias_b
set i = subquery.i
from (
select id, t - lead(t) over (order by id) i
from table_a
) as subquery
where alias_b.id = subquery.id;
Related
Dummy data to illustrate my problem:
create table table1 (category_id int,unit varchar,is_valid bool);
insert into table1 (category_id, unit, is_valid)
VALUES (1, 'a', true), (2, 'z', true);
create table table2 (category_id int,unit varchar);
insert into table2 (category_id, unit)
values(1, 'a'),(1, 'b'),(1, 'c'),(2, 'd'),(2, 'e');
So the data looks like:
Table 1:
category_id
unit
is_valid
1
a
true
2
z
true
Table 2:
category_id
unit
1
a
1
b
1
c
2
d
2
e
I want to update the is_valid column in Table 1, if the category_id/unit combination from Table 1 doesn't match any of the rows in Table 2. For example, the first row in Table 1 is valid, since (1, a) is in Table 2. However, the second row in Table 1 is not valid, since (2, z) is not in Table 2.
How can I update the column using postgresql? I tried a few different where clauses of the form
UPDATE table1 SET is_valid = false WHERE...
but I cannot get a WHERE clause that works how I want.
You can just set the value of is_valid the the result of a ` where exists (select ...). See Demo.
update table1 t1
set is_valid = exists (select null
from table2 t2
where (t2.category_id, t2.unit) = (t1.category_id, t1.unit)
);
NOTES:
Advantage: Query correctly sets the is_valid column regardless of the current value and is a vary simple query.
Disadvantage: Query sets the value of is_valid for every row in the table; even thoes already correctly set.
You need to decide whether the disadvantage out ways the advantage. If so then the same basic technique in a much more complicated query:
with to_valid (category_id, unit, is_valid) as
(select category_id
, unit
, exists (select null
from table2 t2
where (t2.category_id, t2.unit) = (t1.category_id, t1.unit)
)
from table1 t1
)
update table1 tu
set is_valid = to_valid.is_valid
from to_valid
where (tu.category_id, tu.unit) = (to_valid.category_id, to_valid.unit)
and tu.is_valid is distinct from to_valid.is_valid;
Trying to compare between two columns and check if there are no records that exist with the reversal between those two columns. Other Words looking for instances where 1-> 3 exists but 3->1 does not exist. If 1->2 and 2->1 exists we will still consider 1 to be part of the results.
Table = Betweens
start_id | end_id
1 | 2
2 | 1
1 | 3
1 would be added since it is a start to an end with no opposite present of 3,1. Though it did not get added until the 3rd entry since 1 and 2 had an opposite.
So, eventually it will just return names where the reversal does not exist.
I then want to join another table where the number from the previous problem has its name installed on it.
Table = Names
id | name
1 | Mars
2 | Earth
3 | Jupiter
So results will just be the names of those that don't have an opposite.
You can use a not exists condition:
select t1.start_id, t1.end_id
from the_table t1
where not exists (select *
from the_table t2
where t2.end_id = t1.start_id
and t2.start_id = t1.end_id);
I'm not sure about your data volume, so with your ask, below query will supply desired result for you in Sql Server.
create table TableBetweens
(start_id INT,
end_id INT
)
INSERT INTO TableBetweens VALUES(1,2)
INSERT INTO TableBetweens VALUES(2,1)
INSERT INTO TableBetweens VALUES(1,3)
create table TableNames
(id INT,
NAME VARCHAR(50)
)
INSERT INTO TableNames VALUES(1,'Mars')
INSERT INTO TableNames VALUES(2,'Earth')
INSERT INTO TableNames VALUES(3,'Jupiter')
SELECT *
FROM TableNames c
WHERE c.id IN (
SELECT nameid1.nameid
FROM (SELECT a.start_id, a.end_id
FROM TableBetweens a
LEFT JOIN TableBetweens b
ON CONCAT(a.start_id,a.end_id) = CONCAT(b.end_id,b.start_id)
WHERE b.end_id IS NULL
AND b.start_id IS NULL) filterData
UNPIVOT
(
nameid
FOR id IN (filterData.start_id,filterData.end_id)
) AS nameid1
)
I think this requirement is rarely encountered so I couldn't search for similar questions.
I have a table that needs to update the ID. For example ID 123 in table1 is actually supposed to be 456. I have a separate reference table built that stores the mapping (e.g. old 123 maps to new id 456).
I used the below query but apparently it returned error 38104, columns referenced in the ON clause cannot be updated.
MERGE INTO table1
USING ref_table ON (table1.ID = ref_table.ID_Old)
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET table.ID = ref_table.ID_New;
Is there other way to achieve my purpose?
Thanks and much appreciated for your answer!
Use the ROWID pseudocolumn:
SQL Fiddle
Oracle 11g R2 Schema Setup:
CREATE TABLE TABLE1( ID ) AS
SELECT 1 FROM DUAL UNION ALL
SELECT 2 FROM DUAL UNION ALL
SELECT 3 FROM DUAL;
CREATE TABLE REF_TABLE( ID_OLD, ID_NEW ) AS
SELECT 1, 4 FROM DUAL UNION ALL
SELECT 2, 5 FROM DUAL;
MERGE INTO TABLE1 dst
USING ( SELECT t.ROWID AS rid,
r.id_new
FROM TABLE1 t
INNER JOIN REF_TABLE r
ON ( t.id = r.id_old ) ) src
ON ( dst.ROWID = src.RID )
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE SET id = src.id_new;
Query 1:
SELECT * FROM table1
Results:
| ID |
|----|
| 4 |
| 5 |
| 3 |
You can't update a column used in the ON clause in a MERGE. But if you don't need to make other changes that MERGE allows like WHEN NOT MATCHED or deleting, etc. you can just use a UPDATE to achieve this.
You mentioned this is an ID that needs an update. Here's an example using a scalar subquery. As it is an ID, this presumes UNIQUE ID_OLD values in REF_TABLE. I wasn't sure if Every row needs an update or only a sub-set, so set the update here to only update rows that have a value in REF_TABLE.
CREATE TABLE TABLE1(
ID NUMBER
);
CREATE TABLE REF_TABLE(
ID_OLD NUMBER,
ID_NEW NUMBER
);
INSERT INTO TABLE1 VALUES (1);
INSERT INTO TABLE1 VALUES (2);
INSERT INTO TABLE1 VALUES (100);
INSERT INTO REF_TABLE VALUES (1,10);
INSERT INTO REF_TABLE VALUES (2,20);
Initial State:
SELECT * FROM TABLE1;
ID
1
2
100
Then make the UPDATE
UPDATE TABLE1
SET TABLE1.ID = (SELECT REF_TABLE.ID_NEW
FROM REF_TABLE
WHERE REF_TABLE.ID_OLD = ID)
WHERE TABLE1.ID IN (SELECT REF_TABLE.ID_OLD
FROM REF_TABLE);
2 rows updated.
And check the change:
SELECT * FROM TABLE1;
ID
10
20
100
I have the following table:
No Item Value
----------------------------
1 A 5
2 B 8
3 C 9
If I use Min function on Value field, then I'll get 5.
My question is, how can I put the MIN value into a new column? Like the following result:
No Item Value newCol
----------------------------
1 A 5 5
2 B 8 5
3 C 9 5
Is it possible to do that?
Thank you.
Something like:
select No, Item, Value, (select min(value) from table)
from table
should do it.
I'd prefer to do the subquery in a join, you'll have to name the field. Something like this;
Sample Data
CREATE TABLE #TestData (No int, item nvarchar(1), value int)
INSERT INTO #TestData (No, item, value)
VALUES
(1,'A',5)
,(2,'B',8)
,(3,'C',9)
Query
SELECT
td.No
,td.item
,td.value
,a.Min_Value
FROM #TestData td
CROSS JOIN
(
SELECT
MIN(Value) Min_Value
FROM #TestData
) a
Result
No item value Min_Value
1 A 5 5
2 B 8 5
3 C 9 5
You could do that even simpler by using an appropriate OVER() clause.
SELECT *
, MIN(Value) OVER () AS [newCol]
FROM Table
This would be simpler and less resource consuming than a (SELECT MIN(Value) FROM TABLE) in the top level SELECT.
Sample code:
DECLARE #tbl TABLE (No int, Item char(1), Value int)
INSERT #tbl VALUES (1, 'A', 5), (2, 'B', 8), (3, 'C', 9)
SELECT *
, MIN(Value) OVER () AS [newCol]
FROM #tbl
Using cross join with min value from table :
SELECT * FROM #Tbl1 CROSS JOIN (SELECT MIN(Value1) Value1 FROM #Tbl1) A
Lets say I have a table with 2 columns (a, b) with following values:
a b
--- ---
1 5
1 NULL
2 NULL
2 NULL
3 NULL
My desired output:
a
---
2
3
I want to select only those distinct values from column a for which every single occurrence of this value has NULL in column b. Therefore from my desired output, "1" won't come in because there is a "5" in column b even though there is a NULL for the 2nd occurrence of "1".
How can I do this using a TSQL query?
If I understand correctly, you can do this with group by and having:
select a
from t
group by a
having count(b) = 0;
When you use count() with a column name, it counts the number of non-NULL values. Hence, if all values are NULL, then the value will be zero.
It's fairly simple to do:
SELECT A
FROM table1
GROUP BY A
HAVING COUNT(B) = 0
Grouping by A results in all the rows where the value of A is identical to be transferred into a single row in the output. Adding the HAVING clause enables to filter those grouped rows with an aggregate function. COUNT doesn't count NULL values, so when it's 0, there are no other values in B.
Two more ways to do this:
SELECT a
FROM t
EXCEPT
SELECT a
FROM t
WHERE b IS NOT NULL ;
This would use an index on (a, b):
SELECT a
FROM t
GROUP BY a
WHERE MIN(b) IS NOT NULL ;
Try it like this:
DECLARE #tbl TABLE(a INT, b INT);
INSERT INTO #tbl VALUES(1,5),(1,NULL),(2,NULL),(2,NULL),(3,NULL);
--Your test data
SELECT * FROM #tbl;
--And this is what you want - hopefully...
SELECT DISTINCT tbl.a
FROM #tbl AS tbl
WHERE NOT EXISTS(SELECT * FROM #tbl AS x WHERE x.a=tbl.a AND b IS NOT NULL)
To turn your question on it's head, you want the values from column a where there are no non-null values for that value in column b.
select distinct a
from table1 as t1
where 0 = (select count(*)
from table1 as t2
where t1.a = t2.a
and b is not null)
Sample fiddle is here: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!6/5d1b8/1
This should do it:
SELECT DISTINCT a
FROM t
WHERE b IS NULL
AND a NOT IN (SELECT a FROM t WHERE b IS NOT NULL);