I am doing a simple insert and am stumped, I'm new to oracle and unsure of what the issue is. I don't have the table structure so I am guessing that most of the fields are character except the dates.
Anyway here is my query, can anyone find the issue?
INSERT INTO PHANTOM_BOXES (CARRIER_CODE,CARRIER_TRACKING_NO,SENT_DATE,SEND_COST,
RECEIVED_DATE,REC_COST, COMMENTS,SHIPPING_TECH,RECEIVING_TECH)
VALUES ('1','11',TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),'1',
TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),'1','1','26437','0')
WHERE BOX_NO = '6738'
NO where dude.what is ther where for.
INSERT INTO PHANTOM_BOXES (CARRIER_CODE,CARRIER_TRACKING_NO,SENT_DATE,SEND_COST,
RECEIVED_DATE,REC_COST, COMMENTS,SHIPPING_TECH,RECEIVING_TECH,BOX_NO)
VALUES ('1','11',TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),'1',
TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),'1','1','26437','0','6738')
WHERE BOX_NO = '6738'
INSERT statement cannot have a WHERE clause, makes no sense.
Simply do INSERT INTO..VALUES:
INSERT INTO PHANTOM_BOXES (CARRIER_CODE,CARRIER_TRACKING_NO,SENT_DATE,SEND_COST,
RECEIVED_DATE,REC_COST, COMMENTS,SHIPPING_TECH,RECEIVING_TECH)
VALUES ('1','11',TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),'1',
TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),'1','1','26437','0')
Where Clause is used for filter and applying condition Rows which were already present in Table.
Seems you are trying to update the values for WHERE BOX_NO = '6738'
For this you have to use Update Statement
Update PHANTOM_BOXES
Set CARRIER_CODE='1',
CARRIER_TRACKING_NO='11',
SENT_DATE=TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),
SEND_COST='1',
RECEIVED_DATE=TO_DATE('2016-02-04','YYYY-MM-DD'),
REC_COST='1',
COMMENTS,SHIPPING_TECH='26437',
RECEIVING_TECH='0';
Related
please help
IF EXISTS(SELECT * FROM MERC_ADM_VERSION )then UPDATE MERC_ADM_VERSION SET
VER_VALEUR = 20150409 WHERE VER_CLE = 'MEAD' ELSE INSERT INTO MERC_ADM_VERSION
('VER_VALEUR', 'VER_CLE') VALUES (20150409, 'MEAD');
ORA-00900: Invalid SQL statement
Remove the single quotes from the columns in the insert statement.
Instead of
('VER_VALEUR', 'VER_CLE')
It should be
(VER_VALEUR, VER_CLE)
Your question is quite unclear as to what you are trying to do. However, my best interpretation is you are looking for an oracle merge statement. Below is an example based on assumptions I made on the little information you provided. You are most likely looking for a MERGE statement. This allows you to perform a single operation that can either update or insert based on your criteria.
Also, you appear to be using a date, but in number format. I did nothing to address this due to lack of any table definition. You may still have problems with it.
MERGE
INTO merc_adm_version TARGET -- The table you want to update/insert into
USING (SELECT 20150409 as ver_valeur, 'MEAD' as ver_cle FROM dual) SOURCE -- The source of the data
ON (TARGET.ver_cle = SOURCE.ver_cle) -- How to try and match records between source and target
WHEN MATCHED THEN UPDATE SET ver_valeur = 20150409 -- When there is a match, how to update
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN INSERT (ver_cle, ver_valeur) -- When there is not a match, how to insert
VALUES ('MEAD', 20150409);
I have a table with 2 columns. I want to provide the 1st columns value but use a select statement to query another table to figure out the value that will go in the 2nd column of the first table.
Heres what I came up with but I know is wrong..
INSERT INTO VehicleModels_VehicleSubModels (VehicleModelId, VehicleSubModelYearId)
(SELECT #ModelId, VehicleSubModelYearId
FROM VehicleSubYearIntermediate
WHERE SubModelId=#SubModelId
AND YearId=#YearId)
Essentially I want to provide the value for VehicleModelId through #ModelId, but it won't let me use it outside of the select statement.
Try removing the brackets around the SELECT, as presumbably you're seeing an incorrect syntax error?
INSERT INTO VehicleModels_VehicleSubModels (VehicleModelId, VehicleSubModelYearId)
SELECT #ModelId,VehicleSubModelYearId
FROM VehicleSubYearIntermediate
WHERE SubModelId=#SubModelId
AND YearId=#YearId
I created a table with this schema using sqlite3:
CREATE TABLE monitored_files (file_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,file_name VARCHAR(32767),original_relative_dir_path VARCHAR(32767),backupped_relative_dir_path VARCHAR(32767),directory_id INTEGER);
now, I would like to get all the records where original_relative_dir_path is exactly equal to '.', without 's. What I did is this:
select * from monitored_files where original_relative_dir_path='.';
The result is no records even if in the table I have just this record:
1|'P9040479.JPG'|'.'|'.'|1
I read on the web and I see no mistakes in my syntax... I also tried using LIKE '.', but still no results. I'm not an expert of SQL so maybe you can see something wrong?
Thanks!
I see no problem with the statement.
I created the table that you described.
Did an INSERT with the same values that you provided.
And did the query, and also queried without a where clause.
No problems encountered, so I suspect that when you execute your selection, you may not be connected to the correct database.
While contemplating this question about a SQL INSERT statement, it occurred to me that the distinction in syntax between the two statements is largely artificial. That is, why can't we do:
INSERT INTO MyTable SET Field1=Value1, Field2=Value2, ...
or
UPDATE MyTable ( Field1, Field2 ...) VALUES ( Value1, Value2, ... )
WHERE some-key = some-value
Perhaps I'm missing something critical. But for those of us who have had to concatenate our SQL statements in the past, having comparable syntax for an INSERT and an UPDATE statement would have saved a significant amount of coding.
They're serving different grammatical functions. In an update you are specifying a filter that chooses a set of rows to which you will apply an update. And of course that syntax is shared with a SELECT query for the same purpose.
In an INSERT you are not choosing any rows, you are generating a new row which requires specifying a set of values.
In an UPDATE, the LHS=RHS stuff is specifying an expression which yields true or false (or maybe null :) and in an INSERT, the VALUES clause is about assignment of value. So while they are superficially similar, they are semantically quite different, imho. Although I have written a SQL parser, so that may influence my views. :)
SQL Server 2008 has introduced UPSERT functionality via the MERGE command. This is the logical equivalent of
IF FOUND THEN
UPDATE
ELSE
INSERT
I believe this is so that you may make an insert statement without being explicit about the values. If you are putting a value in every single column in the table you can write:
insert into my_table values ("value1", 2);
instead of:
insert into my_table (column1, column2) values ("value1", 2);
When importing and exporting entire (large) databases, this is invaluable for cutting down file size and processing time. Nowadays, with binary snapshots and the like, it may be "less invaluable" :-)
The INSERT syntax I've been using is this
INSERT INTO TableName VALUES (...)
The UPDATE syntax I've been using is
UPDATE TableName SET ColumnName=Value WHERE ...
So in all my code, I have to generate 2 strings, which would result in something like this
insertStr = "(27, 'John Brown', 102)";
updateStr = "ID=27, Name='John Brown', ItemID=102";
and then use them separately
"UPDATE TableName SET " + updateStr + " WHERE ID=27 " +
"IF ##ROWCOUNT=0 "+
"INSERT INTO TableName VALUES (" + insertStr + ")"
It starts bothering me when I am working with tables with like 30 columns.
Can't we generate just one string to use on both INSERT and UPDATE?
eg. using insertStr above on UPDATE statement or updateStr on INSERT statement, or a whole new way?
I think you need a whole new approach. You are open to SQL Injection. Provide us with some sample code as to how you are getting your data inputs and sending the statements to the database.
alt text http://goose.ycp.edu/~weddins/440/S09%20IFS440%20Bobby%20Drop%20Tables.PNG
As far as I'm aware, what you're describing isn't possible in ANSI SQL, or any extension of it that I know. However, I'm mostly familiar with MySQL, and it likely depends completely upon what RDBMS you're using. For example, MySQL has "INSERT ... ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE ... " syntax, which is similar to what you've posted there, and combines an INSERT query with an UPDATE query. The upside is that you are combining two possible operations into a single query, however, the INSERT and UPDATE portions of the query are admittedly different.
Generally, this kind of thing can be abstracted away with an ORM layer in your application. As far as raw SQL goes, I'd be interested in any syntax that worked the way you describe.
Some DBMS' have an extension to do this but why don't you just provide a function to do it for you? We've actually done this before.
I'm not sure what language you're using but it's probably got associative arrays where you can wrote something like:
pk{"ID"} = "27"
val{"Name"} = "'John Brown'"
val{"ItemID"} = "102"
upsert ("MyTable", pk, val)
and, if it doesn't have associative arrays, you can emulate them with multiple integer-based arrays of strings.
In our upsert() function, we just constructed a string (update, then insert if the update failed) and passed it to our DBMS. We kept the primary keys separate from our other fields since that made construction of the update statement a lot easier (primary key columns went in the where clause, other columns were just set).
The result of the calls above would result in the following SQL (we had a different check for failed update but I've put your ##rowcount in for this example):
update MyTable set
Name = 'John Brown',
ItemID = 102
where ID = 27
if ##rowcount=0
insert into MyTable (ID, Name, ItemID) values (
27,
'John Brown',
102
)
That's one solution which worked well for us. No doubt there are others.
Well, how about no statements? You might want to look into an ORM to handle this for you...
Some databases have proprietary extensions that do exactly this.
I agree that the syntax of INSERT and UPDATE could be more consistent, but this is just a fact of life now -- it ain't gonna change now. For many scenarios, the best option is your "whole new way": use an object-relational mapping library (or even a weak-tea layer like .NET DataSets) to abstract away the differences, and stop worrying about the low-level SQL syntax. Not a viable option for every application, of course, but it would allow you to just construct or update an object, call a Save method and have the library figure out the SQL syntax for you.
If you think about it, INSERT and UPDATE are exactly the same thing. They map field names to values, except the UPDATE has a filter.
By creating an associative array, where the key is the field name and the value is the value you want to assign to the field, you have your mapping. You just need to convert it to a the proper string format depending on INSERT or UPDATE.
You just need to create a function that will handle the conversion based on the parameters given.
SQL Server 2008:
MERGE dbo.MyTable AS T
USING
(SELECT
#mykey AS MyKey
#myval AS MyVal
) AS S
ON (T.MyKey = S.MyKey)
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE SET
T.MyVal = S.MyVal
WHEN NOT MATCHED THEN
INSERT (MyKey, MyVal)
VALUES (S.MyKey, S.MyVal)
MySQL:
INSERT (MyKey, MyVal)
INTO MyTable
VALUES({$myKey}, {$myVal})
ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE myVal = {$myVal}