I need to update the rows with SG='All' by perform some recalculations on those rows (for example the sum of the rows with SG!='All' groupped by column G).
I tried doing it in the following manner but I get an error:
WITH UpdateData as
(Select * from Tbl
where SG!='All')
update Tbl
Set Val =(select SUM(ROUND(ud.Val,2)) group by ud.G)
from UpdateData ud
where Tbl.SG='All' and ud.G = Tbl.G
Msg 164, Level 15, State 1, Line 6
Each GROUP BY expression must contain at least one column that is not an outer reference.
And here is how the table looks like:
G SG I Val
B All All 142.215
B T1 123 10.401
B T1 123 60.957
B T2 220 70.857
D All All 96.003
D T3 666 80.158
D T5 700 15.845
After the update, on the first row the value should be:
select ROUND(10.401,2) + ROUND(60.957,2) + ROUND(70.857,2) = 10.4+60.96+70.86 =142.22 instead of 142.215
The real situation is more complex and I want to avoid recalculating the all rows, so I prefer doing an update rather than delete and readd them. Thanks a lot
Works like this. Thanks Mihai!
WITH UpdateData as
(Select * from Tbl
where SG!='All')
update Tbl
Set Val =(select SUM(ROUND(ud.Val,2))
from UpdateData ud
where Tbl.SG='All' and ud.G = Tbl.G
group by ud.G)
where Tbl.SG='All'
hope this will work,
update Tbl
set Tbl.Val = = t.Value
from
(select SUM(ROUND(ud.Val,2)) as Value, ud.G
from UpdateData ud
where ud.G = Tbl.G
group by ud.G) as t
where Tbl.SG='All'
Related
I have this query in postgresql:
select *
from A s
join B m on (s.id=m.id)
where m.key=4 and s.ran=some_input_from_user
This gives me all the rows that I need to update.
I want to set A.value to be 90 for all these rows.
It doesn't look like a standart update query
if I do...
Update A set value=90 where.....
then I can't do the join.
any ideas how to do it?
This is the basic update syntax for PostgreSQL where you are updating based on a join to another table:
update A s
set
value = 90
from B m
where
s.id = m.id and
m.key = 4 and
s.ran = some_input_from_user
The trick is you never use the alias in the lvalue for the set commands. In other words, value = 90 is not s.value = 90. It seems minor, but I'm pretty sure it will prevent your query from working. The rationale is if you are updating table A (alias s) then any fields you are updating are, de-facto, from table A -- no need to alias them, and to allow aliases would almost imply you could update something other than A with this statement, which you cannot.
You can definitely use them in the rvalues, so this would certainly be okay (if it were your desire to update A based on B):
update A s
set
value = m.salary * s.commission
from B m
where
s.id = m.id and
(s.value is null or
s.value != m.salary * s.commission)
Here is the query:
update a set value = 90
where exists (
select 1 from b
where a.id = b.id and b.key=4
and a.ran=some_input_from_user);
The above query will eliminate the requirement of reading table a twice.
Also you can use this query:
update a set value = 90
where a.id in
(select b.id from b
where a.id = b.id and b.key = 4
and a.ran=some_input_from_user);
TRY THIS
UPDATE A
SET A.VALUE = 90
from A
join B m on (A.id=m.id)
where m.key=4 and s.ran=some_input_from_user
Basically, I want to do this:
update vehicles_vehicle v
join shipments_shipment s on v.shipment_id=s.id
set v.price=s.price_per_vehicle;
I'm pretty sure that would work in MySQL (my background), but it doesn't seem to work in postgres. The error I get is:
ERROR: syntax error at or near "join"
LINE 1: update vehicles_vehicle v join shipments_shipment s on v.shi...
^
Surely there's an easy way to do this, but I can't find the proper syntax. So, how would I write this In PostgreSQL?
The UPDATE syntax is:
[ WITH [ RECURSIVE ] with_query [, ...] ]
UPDATE [ ONLY ] table [ [ AS ] alias ]
SET { column = { expression | DEFAULT } |
( column [, ...] ) = ( { expression | DEFAULT } [, ...] ) } [, ...]
[ FROM from_list ]
[ WHERE condition | WHERE CURRENT OF cursor_name ]
[ RETURNING * | output_expression [ [ AS ] output_name ] [, ...] ]
In your case I think you want this:
UPDATE vehicles_vehicle AS v
SET price = s.price_per_vehicle
FROM shipments_shipment AS s
WHERE v.shipment_id = s.id
Or if you need to join on two or more tables:
UPDATE table_1 t1
SET foo = 'new_value'
FROM table_2 t2
JOIN table_3 t3 ON t3.id = t2.t3_id
WHERE
t2.id = t1.t2_id
AND t3.bar = True;
The answer of Mark Byers is the optimal in this situation.
Though in more complex situations you can take the select query that returns rowids and calculated values and attach it to the update query like this:
with t as (
-- Any generic query which returns rowid and corresponding calculated values
select t1.id as rowid, f(t2, t2) as calculatedvalue
from table1 as t1
join table2 as t2 on t2.referenceid = t1.id
)
update table1
set value = t.calculatedvalue
from t
where id = t.rowid
This approach lets you develop and test your select query and in two steps convert it to the update query.
So in your case the result query will be:
with t as (
select v.id as rowid, s.price_per_vehicle as calculatedvalue
from vehicles_vehicle v
join shipments_shipment s on v.shipment_id = s.id
)
update vehicles_vehicle
set price = t.calculatedvalue
from t
where id = t.rowid
Note that column aliases are mandatory otherwise PostgreSQL will complain about the ambiguity of the column names.
Let me explain a little more by my example.
Task: correct info, where abiturients (students about to leave secondary school) have submitted applications to university earlier, than they got school certificates (yes, they got certificates earlier, than they were issued (by certificate date specified). So, we will increase application submit date to fit certificate issue date.
Thus. next MySQL-like statement:
UPDATE applications a
JOIN (
SELECT ap.id, ab.certificate_issued_at
FROM abiturients ab
JOIN applications ap
ON ab.id = ap.abiturient_id
WHERE ap.documents_taken_at::date < ab.certificate_issued_at
) b
ON a.id = b.id
SET a.documents_taken_at = b.certificate_issued_at;
Becomes PostgreSQL-like in such a way
UPDATE applications a
SET documents_taken_at = b.certificate_issued_at -- we can reference joined table here
FROM abiturients b -- joined table
WHERE
a.abiturient_id = b.id AND -- JOIN ON clause
a.documents_taken_at::date < b.certificate_issued_at -- Subquery WHERE
As you can see, original subquery JOIN's ON clause have become one of WHERE conditions, which is conjucted by AND with others, which have been moved from subquery with no changes. And there is no more need to JOIN table with itself (as it was in subquery).
For those actually wanting to do a JOIN you can also use:
UPDATE a
SET price = b_alias.unit_price
FROM a AS a_alias
LEFT JOIN b AS b_alias ON a_alias.b_fk = b_alias.id
WHERE a_alias.unit_name LIKE 'some_value'
AND a.id = a_alias.id;
You can use the a_alias in the SET section on the right of the equals sign if needed.
The fields on the left of the equals sign don't require a table reference as they are deemed to be from the original "a" table.
For those wanting to do a JOIN that updates ONLY the rows your join returns use:
UPDATE a
SET price = b_alias.unit_price
FROM a AS a_alias
LEFT JOIN b AS b_alias ON a_alias.b_fk = b_alias.id
WHERE a_alias.unit_name LIKE 'some_value'
AND a.id = a_alias.id
--the below line is critical for updating ONLY joined rows
AND a.pk_id = a_alias.pk_id;
This was mentioned above but only through a comment..Since it's critical to getting the correct result posting NEW answer that Works
Here we go:
update vehicles_vehicle v
set price=s.price_per_vehicle
from shipments_shipment s
where v.shipment_id=s.id;
Simple as I could make it.
To add something quite important to all the great answers above, when you want to update a join-table, you may have 2 problems:
you cannot use the table you want to update to JOIN another one
Postgres wants a ON clause after the JOIN so you cannot only use where clauses.
This means that basically, the following queries are not valid:
UPDATE join_a_b
SET count = 10
FROM a
JOIN b on b.id = join_a_b.b_id -- Not valid since join_a_b is used here
WHERE a.id = join_a_b.a_id
AND a.name = 'A'
AND b.name = 'B'
UPDATE join_a_b
SET count = 10
FROM a
JOIN b -- Not valid since there is no ON clause
WHERE a.id = join_a_b.a_id
AND b.id = join_a_b.b_id
a.name = 'A'
AND b.name = 'B'
Instead, you must use all the tables in the FROM clause like this:
UPDATE join_a_b
SET count = 10
FROM a, b
WHERE a.id = join_a_b.a_id
AND b.id = join_a_b.b_id
AND a.name = 'A'
AND b.name = 'B'
It might be straightforward for some but I got stuck on this problem wondering what's going on so hopefully, it will help others.
Here's a simple SQL that updates Mid_Name on the Name3 table using the Middle_Name field from Name:
update name3
set mid_name = name.middle_name
from name
where name3.person_id = name.person_id;
The link below has a example that resolve and helps understant better how use update and join with postgres.
UPDATE product
SET net_price = price - price * discount
FROM
product_segment
WHERE
product.segment_id = product_segment.id;
See: http://www.postgresqltutorial.com/postgresql-update-join/
First Table Name: tbl_table1 (tab1).
Second Table Name: tbl_table2 (tab2).
Set the tbl_table1's ac_status column to "INACTIVE"
update common.tbl_table1 as tab1
set ac_status= 'INACTIVE' --tbl_table1's "ac_status"
from common.tbl_table2 as tab2
where tab1.ref_id= '1111111'
and tab2.rel_type= 'CUSTOMER';
To UPDATE one Table using another, in PostGRE SQL / AWS (SQL workbench).
In PostGRE SQL, this is how you need to use joins in UPDATE Query:
UPDATE TABLEA set COLUMN_FROM_TABLEA = COLUMN_FROM_TABLEB FROM TABLEA,TABLEB WHERE FILTER_FROM_TABLEA = FILTER_FROM_TABLEB;
Example:
Update Employees Set Date_Of_Exit = Exit_Date_Recorded , Exit_Flg = 1 From Employees, Employee_Exit_Clearance Where Emp_ID = Exit_Emp_ID
Table A - Employees Columns in Table A - Date_Of_Exit,Emp_ID,Exit_Flg Table B is - Employee_Exit_Clearance Columns in Table B - Exit_Date_Recorded,Exit_Emp_ID
1760 rows affected
Execution time: 29.18s
--goal: update selected columns with join (postgres)--
UPDATE table1 t1
SET column1 = 'data'
FROM table1
RIGHT JOIN table2
ON table2.id = table1.id
WHERE t1.id IN
(SELECT table2.id FROM table2 WHERE table2.column2 = 12345)
The first way is slower than the second way.
First:
DO $$
DECLARE
page int := 10000;
min_id bigint; max_id bigint;
BEGIN
SELECT max(id),min(id) INTO max_id,min_id FROM opportunities;
FOR j IN min_id..max_id BY page LOOP
UPDATE opportunities SET sec_type = 'Unsec'
FROM opportunities AS opp
INNER JOIN accounts AS acc
ON opp.account_id = acc.id
WHERE acc.borrower = true
AND opp.sec_type IS NULL
AND opp.id >= j AND opp.id < j+page;
COMMIT;
END LOOP;
END; $$;
Second:
DO $$
DECLARE
page int := 10000;
min_id bigint; max_id bigint;
BEGIN
SELECT max(id),min(id) INTO max_id,min_id FROM opportunities;
FOR j IN min_id..max_id BY page LOOP
UPDATE opportunities AS opp
SET sec_type = 'Unsec'
FROM accounts AS acc
WHERE opp.account_id = acc.id
AND opp.sec_type IS NULL
AND acc.borrower = true
AND opp.id >= j AND opp.id < j+page;
COMMIT;
END LOOP;
END; $$;
WORKS PERFECT!!!
POSTGRE SQL - UPDATE With a JOIN
BELOW CODE - Check the positioning of columns and IDs as below:
If you place it exactly as below, then only it will work!
---IF you want to update FIRST table
UPDATE table1
SET attribute1 = table2.attribute1
FROM table2
WHERE table2.product_ID = table1.product_ID;
OR
---IF you want to update SECOND table
UPDATE table2
SET attribute1 = table1.attribute1
FROM table1
WHERE table1.product_ID = table2.product_ID;
Table 1 looks like the following.
ID SIZE TYPE SERIAL
1 4 W-meter1 123456
2 5 W-meter2 123456
3 4 W-meter 585858
4 4 W-Meter 398574
As you can see. Items 1 and 2 both have the same Serial Number. I have an innerjoin update statement that will update the UniqueID on these devices based on linking their serial number to the list.
What I would like to do. Is modify by hand the items with duplicate serial numbers and scripted update the ones that are unique. Im presuming I have to reference the distinct command here somewhere buy not sure.
This is my update statement as is. Pretty simple and straight forward.
update UM00400
Set um00400.umEquipmentID = tb2.MIUNo
from UM00400 tb1
inner join AA_Meters tb2 on
tb1.umSerialNumber = tb2.Old_Serial_Num
where tb1.umSerialNumber <> tb2.New_Serial_Num
;WITH CTE
AS
(
SELECT * , rn = ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY SERIAL ORDER BY SERIAL)
FROM UM00400
)
UPDATE CTE
SET CTE.umEquipmentID = tb2.MIUNo
inner join AA_Meters tb2
on CTE.umSerialNumber = tb2.Old_Serial_Num
where tb1.umSerialNumber <> tb2.New_Serial_Num
AND CTE.rn = 1
This will update the 1st record of multiple records with the same SERIAL.
If i understand your question correctly below query will help you out :
;WITH CTE AS
(
// getting those serial numbers which are not duplicated
SELECT umSerialNumber,COUNT(umSerialNumber) as CountOfSerialNumber
FROM UM00400
GROUP BY umSerialNumber
HAVING COUNT(umSerialNumber) = 1
)
UPDATE A SET A.umEquipmentID = C.MIUNo
FROM UM00400 A
INNER JOIN CTE B ON A.umSerialNumber = B.umSerialNumber
INNER JOIN AA_Meters C ON A.umSerialNumber = C.Old_Serial_Num
I've created a junction table like this one:
http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/822/kantotype.png
I was trying to figure out a query that could able to select some rows - based on the PokémonID - and then updating only the first or second row after the major "filtering".
For example:
Let's suppose that I would like to change the value of the TypeID from the second row containing PokémonID = 2. I cannot simply use UPDATE KantoType SET TypeID = x WHERE PokémonID = 2, because it will change both rows!
I've already tried to use subqueries containing IN,EXISTS and LIMIT, but with no success.
Its unclear what are your trying to do. However, you can UPDATE with JOIN like so:
UPDATE
SET k1.TypeID = 'somethng' -- or some value from k2
FROM KantoType k1
INNER JOIN
(
Some filtering and selecting
) k2 ON k1.PokémonID = k2.PokémonID
WHERE k1.PokémonID = 2;
Or: if you want to UPDATE only the two rows that have PokémonID = 2 you can do this:
WITH CTE
AS
(
SELECT *,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER(ORDER BY TypeID) rownum
FROM KantoType
WHERE PokemonID = 2
)
UPDATE c
SET c.TypeID = 5
FROM CTE c
WHERE c.rownum = 1;
SQL Fiddle Demo
I can suggest something like this if you just need to update a single line in your table:
UPDATE kantotype
SET
type = 2
WHERE pokemon = 2
AND NOT EXISTS (SELECT * FROM kantotype k2
WHERE kantotype.type > k2.type
AND kantotype.pokemon = k2.pokemon)
It would be easier to get the first or last item of the table if you had unique identifier field in your table.
Not sure even if you are trying to update the row with PokemenID =2 by doing a major filtering on TypeID... So just out of assumptiong (big one), you can give a try on Case
UPDATE yourtable a
LEFT JOIN youtable b on a.pokeid = b.pokeid
SET a.typeid = (CASE
WHEN a.typeid < b.typeid THEN yourupdatevalue
WHEN a.typeid > b.typeid THEN someothervalue
ELSE a.typeid END);
If you know the pokemon ID and the type id then just add both to the where clause of your query.
UPDATE KantoType
SET TypeID = x
WHERE PokémonID = 2
AND TypeID=1
If you don't know the type ID, then you need to provide more information about what you're trying to accomplish. It's not clear why you don't have this information.
Perhaps think about what is the unique identifier in your data set.
This is quite easy and has been asked multiple times but I can't get it to work.
The SQL query I think should work is:
UPDATE table2
SET dst.a = dst.a + src.a,
dst.b = dst.b + src.b,
dst.c = dst.c + src.c,
dst.d = dst.d + src.d,
dst.e = dst.e + src.e
FROM table2 AS dst
INNER JOIN table1 AS src
ON dst.f = src.f
Using the update statement it is not possible because in sqlite joins in an update statement are not supported. See docs:
update statement
If you only wanted to update a single column to a static value, you could use a subquery in the update statement correctly. See this example: How do I make an UPDATE while joining tables on SQLite?
Now in your example, making an assumption that there is a unique key on "column f" - a workaround/solution I have come up with is using the replace statement:
replace into table2
(a, b, c, d, e, f, g)
select src.a, src.b, src.c, src.d, src.e, dest.f, dest.g
from table1 src
inner join table2 dest on src.f = dest.f
I also added an extra column to table2 "column g" to show how you'd "update" only some of the columns with this method.
One other thing to be cautious about is if you use "PRAGMA foreign_keys = ON;" it's possible to have issues with this as the row is effectively deleted and inserted.
I came up with an alternative technique using a TRIGGER and "reversing" the direction of the update, albeit at the cost of a dummy field in the source table.
In general terms, you have a Master table and an Updates table. You want to update some/all fields of records in Master from the corresponding fields in Updates linked by a key field Key.
Instead of UPDATE Master SET ... FROM Master INNER JOIN Updates ON Mater.Key = Updates.Key you do the following:
Add a dummy field TriggerField to the Updates table to act as the focus of the trigger.
Create a trigger on this field:
CREATE TRIGGER UpdateTrigger AFTER UPDATE OF TriggerField ON Updates
BEGIN
UPDATE Master SET
Field1 = OLD.Field1,
Field2 = OLD.Field2,
...
WHERE Master.Key = OLD.Key
END;
Launch the update process with the following:
UPDATE Updates SET TriggerField = NULL ;
Notes
The dummy field is merely an anchor for the trigger so that any other UPDATE Updates SET ... won't trigger the update into Master. If you only ever INSERT into Updates then you don't need it (and can remove the OF TriggerField clause when creating the trigger).
From some rough-and-ready timings, this seems to work about the same speed as REPLACE INTO but avoids the feels-slightly-wrong technique of removing and adding rows. It is also simpler if you are only updating a few fields in Master as you only list the ones you want to change.
It is orders of magnitude faster than the other alternative I've seen to UPDATE ... FROM which is:
UPDATE Master SET
Field1 = ( SELECT Field1 FROM Updates WHERE Mater.Key = Updates.Key ),
Field1 = ( SELECT Field1 FROM Updates WHERE Mater.Key = Updates.Key ),
...
;
Updating six fields over 1700 records was roughly 0.05s for Tony and my methods but 2.50s for the UPDATE ... ( SELECT... ) method.
AFTER UPDATE triggers on Master seem to fire as expected.
As Tony says, the solution is the replace into way but you can use the sqlite hidden field rowid to simulate full update with join like:
replace into table2
(rowid,a, b, c, d, e, f, g)
select dest.rowid,src.a, src.b, src.c, src.d, src.e, dest.f, dest.g
from table1 src
inner join table2 dest on src.f = dest.f
With this you recreate full rows if you don't have primary key for the replace or as standard method to do the updates with joins.
SQLITE does not support UPDATE with INNER JOIN nor do several other DB's. Inner Joins are nice and simple however it can be accomplished using just a UPDATE and a subquery select. By using a where clause and the 'IN' with a subquery and a additional subquery for the 'SET' the same result can always be accomplished. Below is how it's done.
UPDATE table2
SET a = a + (select a from table1 where table1.f = table2.f),
b = b + (select b from table1 where table1.f = table2.f),
c = c + (select c from table1 where table1.f = table2.f),
d = d + (select d from table1 where table1.f = table2.f),
e = e + (select e from table1 where table1.f = table2.f)
WHERE RowId IN (Select table2.RowId from table1 where table1.f = table2.f)
Use below query:
UPDATE table2
SET a = Z.a,
b = Z.b,
c = Z.c,
d = Z.d,
e = Z.e
FROM (SELECT dst.id,
dst.a + src.a AS a,
dst.b + src.b AS b,
dst.c + src.c AS c,
dst.d + src.d AS d,
dst.e + src.e AS e
FROM table2 AS dst
INNER JOIN table1 AS src ON dst.f = src.f
)Z
WHERE table2.id = z.id