I am investigating the benefits of Oracle Text search, and currently am looking at collecting search text data from multiple (related) tables and storing the data in the smaller table in a 1-to-many relationship.
Consider these 2 simple tables, house and inhabitants, and there are NEVER any uninhabited houses:
HOUSE
ID Address Search_Text
1 44 Some Road
2 31 Letsby Avenue
3 18 Moon Crescent
INHABITANT
ID House Name Nickname
1 1 Jane Doe Janey
2 1 John Doe JD
3 2 Jo Smythe Smithy
4 2 Percy Plum PC
5 3 Apollo Lander Moony
I want to to write SQL that updates the HOUSE.Search_Text column with text from INHABITANT. Now because this is a 1-to-many, the SQL needs to collate the data in INHABITANT for each matching row in house, and then combine the data (comma separated) and update the Search_Text field.
Once done, the Oracle Text search index on HOUSE.Search_Text will return me HOUSEs that match the search criteria, and I can look up INHABITANTs accordingly.
Of course, this is a very simplified example, I want to pick up data from many columns and Full Text Search across fields in both tables.
With the help of a colleague we've got:
select id, ADDRESS||'; '||Names||'; '||Nicknames as Search_Text
from house left join(
SELECT distinct house_id,
LISTAGG(NAME, ', ') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY NAME) OVER (PARTITION BY house_id) as Names,
LISTAGG(NICKNAME, ', ') WITHIN GROUP (ORDER BY NICKNAME) OVER (PARTITION BY house_id) as Nicknames
FROM INHABITANT)
i on house.id = i.house_id;
which returns:
1 44 Some Road; Jane Doe, John Doe; JD, Janey
2 31 Letsby Avenue; Jo Smythe, Percy Plum; PC, Smithy
3 18 Moon Crescent; Apollo Lander; Moony
Some questions:
Is this an efficient query to return this data? I'm slightly
concerned about the distinct.
Is this the right way to use Oracle Text search across multiple text fields?
How to update House.Search_Text with the results above? I think I need a correlated subquery, but can't quite work it out.
Would it be more efficient to create a new table containing House_ID and Search_Text only, rather than update House?
Related
From this Question we learned to use a subquery to find information once-removed.
Subquery we learned :
SELECT * FROM papers WHERE writer_id IN ( SELECT id FROM writers WHERE boss_id = 4 );
Now, I need to search a table, both in column values that table, and in column values related by id on another table.
Here are the same tables, but col values contain more text for our "searching" reference...
writers :
id
name
boss_id
1
John Jonno
2
2
Bill Bosworth
2
3
Andy Seaside
4
4
Hank Little
4
5
Alex Crisp
4
The writers have papers they write...
papers :
id
title
writer_id
1
Boston
1
2
Chicago
4
3
Cisco
3
4
Seattle
2
5
North
5
I can use this to search only the names on writers...
Search only writers.name : (Not what I want to do)
SELECT * FROM writers WHERE LOWER(name) LIKE LOWER('%is%');
Output for above search : (Not what I want to do)
id
name
boss_id
5
Alex Crisp
4
I want to return cols from writers (not papers), but searching text both in writers.name and the writers.id-associated papers.title.
For example, if I searched "is", I would get both:
Alex Crisp (for 'is' in the name 'Crisp')
Andy Seaside (because Andy wrote a paper with 'is' in the title 'Cisco')
Output for "is" search :
id
title
writer_id
2
Chicago
4
4
Seattle
2
Here's what I have that doesn't work:
SELECT * FROM papers WHERE LOWER(title) LIKE LOWER('%is%') OR writer_id ( writers=writer_id WHERE LOWER(name) LIKE LOWER('%$is%') );
The best way to express this criteria is by using a correlated query with exists:
select *
from writers w
where Lower(w.name) like '%is%'
or exists (
select * from papers p
where p.writer_id = w.id and Lower(p.title) like '%is%'
);
Note you don't need to use lower on the string you are providing, and you should only use lower if your collation truly is case-sensitive as using the function makes the search predicate unsargable.
Since you want to return cols from writers (not papers) you should select them first, and use stuff from papers in the criteria
select *
from writers w
where
w.name like '%is%'
or
w.id in (select p.writer_id
paper p
where p.title like '%is%'
)
You can add your LOWER functions (my sql environment is not case-sensitive, so I didn't need them)
This has been driving me and my team up the wall. I cannot compose a query that will strict match a single record that has a specific permutation of look ups.
We have a single lookup table
room_member_lookup:
room | member
---------------
A | Michael
A | Josh
A | Kyle
B | Kyle
B | Monica
C | Michael
I need to match a room with an exact list of members but everything else I've tried on stack overflow will still match room A even if I ask for a room with ONLY Josh and Kyle
I've tried queries like
SELECT room FROM room_member_lookup
WHERE member IN (Josh, Michael)
GROUP BY room
HAVING COUNT(1) = 2
However this will still return room A even though that has 3 members I need a exact member permutation and that matches the room even not partials.
SELECT room
FROM room_member_lookup a
WHERE member IN ('Monica', 'Kyle')
-- Make sure that the room 'a' has exactly two members
and (select count(*)
from room_member_lookup b
where a.room=b.room)=2
GROUP BY room
-- and both members are in that room
HAVING COUNT(1) = 2
Depending on the SQL dialect, one can build a dynamic table (CTE or select .. union all) to hold the member set (Monica and Kyle, for example), and then look for set equivalence using MINUS/EXCEPT sql operators.
I have an system where users are able to select multiple values from different fields whilst filling out an application. All of the various values for those multi-values fields are contained in one table, linked to the user's entry application by an application ID. (I would not have designed it this way but I inherited the db). I'm trying to write a select statement that queries multiple rows in Table 2 based on unique row in Table 1.
So, tables look like this:
Application Table (Table1)
Application_ID
Applicant_Name
Application_Title
Application_Date
1073
John Smith
John's Application
07/15/2021
2104
Belinda Jones
Belinda Applies
07/29/2021
Selection Table(Table2)
Application_ID
Name
Value
Sort_Order
1073
State
Texas
2
1073
State
Ohio
1
1073
Color
Red
2
1073
Color
Blue
1
1073
Color
Orange
2
2104
Color
Green
1
2104
Color
Purple
2
2104
State
Delaware
1
I've previously used a left join to pull the values from just one multi-value field in the Selection Table:
select Left(Selection,Value,100) as 'State'
and later in the where cause, define which row by using:
where Selection.Name = 'State'
and Selection.Sort_order = 1
But I can't sort out the best way to write a select statement that pulls all values from the Selection table per Application ID. I need to have the values from all of the multi-value fields (Name from Table 2) associated with the one Application ID.
I think you need some conditional aggregation here -
SELECT Applicant_Name, Application_Title, Application_Date,
STRING_AGG(iif(Name = 'State', Value, ''), ',') STATE,
STRING_AGG(iif(Name = 'Color', Value, ''), ',') COLOR
FROM Table1 T1
LEFT JOIN Table2 T2 ON T1.Application_ID = T2.Application_ID
GROUP BY Applicant_Name, Application_Title, Application_Date;
Not sure how to describe this, but I want to group a row of values, where one field has two or more different values and set the value of that (but concatenating or changing the values) to give just one single row.
For example:
I have a simple table (all fields are Strings) of people next to their departments. But some people belong to more than one department.
select department_ind, name
from jobs
;
department_ind name
1 Michael
2 Michael
2 Sarah
3 Dave
2 Sally
4 Sally
I want to group by name, and concatenate the department_ind. So the results show look like:
department_ind name
1,2 Michael
2 Sarah
3 Dave
2,4 Sally
Thanks
Use string_agg()
select string_agg(department_ind::text, ',') as departments,
name
from jobs
group by name;
Right now I've got a Main table in which I am uploading data. Because the Main table has many different duplicates, I Append various data out of the Main table into other tables such as, username, phone number, and locations in order to keep things optimized. Once I have everything stripped down from the Main table, I then append what's left into a final optimized Main table. Before this happens though, I run a select query joining all the stripped tables with the original Main table in order to connect the IDs from each table, with the correct data. For example:
Original Main Table
--Name---------Number------Due Date-------Location-------Charges Monthly-----Charges Total--
John Smith 111-1111 4/3 Chicago 234.56 500.23
Todd Jones 222-2222 4/3 New York 174.34 323.56
John Smith 111-1111 4/3 Chicago 274.56 670.23
Bill James 333-3333 4/3 Orlando 100.00 100.00
This gets split into 3 tables (name, number, location) and then there is a date table with all the dates for the year:
Name Table Number Table Location Table Due Date Table
--ID---Name------ -ID--Number--------- ---ID---Location---- --Date---
1 John Smith 1 111-1111 1 Chicago 4/1
2 Todd Jones 2 222-2222 2 New York 4/2
3 Bill James 3 333-3333 3 Orlando 4/3
Before The Original table gets stripped, I run a select query that grabs the ID from the 3 new tables, and joins them based on the connection they have with the original Main table.
Select Output
--Name ID----Number ID---Location ID---Due Date--
1 1 1 4/3
2 2 2 4/3
1 1 1 4/3
3 3 3 4/3
My issue comes when I need to introduce a new table that isn't able to be tied into the Original Main Table. I have an inventory table that, much like the original Main table, has duplicates and needs to be optimized. I do this by creating a secondary table that takes all the duplicated devices out and put them in their own table, and then strips the username and number out and puts them into their tables. I would like to add the IDs from this new device table into the select output that I have above. Resulting in:
Select Output
--Name ID----Number ID---Location ID---Due Date--Device ID---
1 1 1 4/3 1
2 2 2 4/3 1
1 1 1 4/3 2
3 3 3 4/3 1
Unlike the previous tables, the device table has no relationship to the originalMain Table, which is what is causing me so much headache. I can't seem to find a way to make this happen...is there anyway to accomplish this?
Any two tables can be joined. A table represents an application relationship. In some versions (not the original) of Entity-Relationship Modelling (notice that the "R" in E-R stands for "(application) relationship"!) a foreign key is sometimes called a "relationship". You do not need other tables or FKs to join any two tables.
Explain, in terms of its column names and the values for those names, exactly when a row should turn up in the result. Maybe you want:
SELECT *
FROM the stripped-and-ID'd version of the Original AS o
JOIN the stripped-and-ID'd version of the Device AS d
USING NameID, NumberID, LocationID and DueDate
Ie
SELECT *
FROM the stripped-and-ID'd version of the Original AS o
JOIN the stripped-and-ID'd version of the Device AS d
ON o.NameID=d.NameId AND o.NumberID=d.NumberID
AND o.LocationID=d.LocationID AND o.DueDateID=d.DueDate.
Suppose p(a,...) is some statement parameterized by a,... .
If o holds the rows where o(NameID,NumberID,LocationID,DueDate) and d holds the rows where d(NameID,NumberID,LocationID,DueDate,DeviceID) then the above holds the rows where o(NameID, NumberID, LocationID, DueDate) AND d(NameID,NumberID,LocationID,DueDate,DeviceID). But you really have not explained what rows you want.
The only way to "join" tables that have no relation is by unioning them together:
select attribute1, attribute2, ... , attributeN
from table1
where <predicate>
union // or union all
select attribute1, attribute2, ... , attributeN
from table2
where <predicate>
the where clauses are obviously optional
EDIT
optionally you could join the tables together by stating ON true which will act like a cross product