I'm building SQL queries on the fly and am a bit of a beginner with them.
How would I do something like:
Select * from X where Type = *Any*
Basically, I want to select all of them. I know I could not include the where but often times the Type variable does in fact have values. I want to be able to replace the "Any" part with something else on the fly rather than a whole different expression...
I think this is what you are looking for:
--please change the datatype int to match your datatype for type column
DECLARE #type int = 1;
SELECT * FROM X
WHERE x.[Type] = COALESCE(#type,x.[type]);
If you don't pass a value in variable #type, it will default to your type and return everything. Otherwise, it will supply the variable value as needed. Hope this helps!
This kind of depends on what your SQL implementation is. That being said the two concepts you are missing are using the keyword "LIKE" instead of "=", and using wildcards. I advise going through W3Schools SQL section to get started, or better yet buy some introduction to SQL book. http://www.w3schools.com/sql/default.asp
SELECT * FROM X
WHERE Type LIKE '%';
select * from X where Type Like '%';
If you want everything it is simple:
SELECT *
FROM my_table
There is no where clause , in this case. You usually want to first try something like this , though:
SELECT *
FROM my_table
WHERE rownum < 2
But rownum is an Oracle-specific column. You need to look it up for your specific database .
Related
Why would someone use WHERE 1=1 AND <conditions> in a SQL clause (Either SQL obtained through concatenated strings, either view definition)
I've seen somewhere that this would be used to protect against SQL Injection, but it seems very weird.
If there is injection WHERE 1 = 1 AND injected OR 1=1 would have the same result as injected OR 1=1.
Later edit: What about the usage in a view definition?
Thank you for your answers.
Still,
I don't understand why would someone use this construction for defining a view, or use it inside a stored procedure.
Take this for example:
CREATE VIEW vTest AS
SELECT FROM Table WHERE 1=1 AND table.Field=Value
If the list of conditions is not known at compile time and is instead built at run time, you don't have to worry about whether you have one or more than one condition. You can generate them all like:
and <condition>
and concatenate them all together. With the 1=1 at the start, the initial and has something to associate with.
I've never seen this used for any kind of injection protection, as you say it doesn't seem like it would help much. I have seen it used as an implementation convenience. The SQL query engine will end up ignoring the 1=1 so it should have no performance impact.
Just adding a example code to Greg's answer:
dim sqlstmt as new StringBuilder
sqlstmt.add("SELECT * FROM Products")
sqlstmt.add(" WHERE 1=1")
''// From now on you don't have to worry if you must
''// append AND or WHERE because you know the WHERE is there
If ProductCategoryID <> 0 then
sqlstmt.AppendFormat(" AND ProductCategoryID = {0}", trim(ProductCategoryID))
end if
If MinimunPrice > 0 then
sqlstmt.AppendFormat(" AND Price >= {0}", trim(MinimunPrice))
end if
I've seen it used when the number of conditions can be variable.
You can concatenate conditions using an " AND " string. Then, instead of counting the number of conditions you're passing in, you place a "WHERE 1=1" at the end of your stock SQL statement and throw on the concatenated conditions.
Basically, it saves you having to do a test for conditions and then add a "WHERE" string before them.
Seems like a lazy way to always know that your WHERE clause is already defined and allow you to keep adding conditions without having to check if it is the first one.
Indirectly Relevant: when 1=2 is used:
CREATE TABLE New_table_name
as
select *
FROM Old_table_name
WHERE 1 = 2;
this will create a new table with same schema as old table. (Very handy if you want to load some data for compares)
I found this pattern useful when I'm testing or double checking things on the database, so I can very quickly comment other conditions:
CREATE VIEW vTest AS
SELECT FROM Table WHERE 1=1
AND Table.Field=Value
AND Table.IsValid=true
turns into:
CREATE VIEW vTest AS
SELECT FROM Table WHERE 1=1
--AND Table.Field=Value
--AND Table.IsValid=true
1 = 1 expression is commonly used in generated sql code. This expression can simplify sql generating code reducing number of conditional statements.
Actually, I've seen this sort of thing used in BIRT reports. The query passed to the BIRT runtime is of the form:
select a,b,c from t where a = ?
and the '?' is replaced at runtime by an actual parameter value selected from a drop-down box. The choices in the drop-down are given by:
select distinct a from t
union all
select '*' from sysibm.sysdummy1
so that you get all possible values plus "*". If the user selects "*" from the drop down box (meaning all values of a should be selected), the query has to be modified (by Javascript) before being run.
Since the "?" is a positional parameter and MUST remain there for other things to work, the Javascript modifies the query to be:
select a,b,c from t where ((a = ?) or (1==1))
That basically removes the effect of the where clause while still leaving the positional parameter in place.
I've also seen the AND case used by lazy coders whilst dynamically creating an SQL query.
Say you have to dynamically create a query that starts with select * from t and checks:
the name is Bob; and
the salary is > $20,000
some people would add the first with a WHERE and subsequent ones with an AND thus:
select * from t where name = 'Bob' and salary > 20000
Lazy programmers (and that's not necessarily a bad trait) wouldn't distinguish between the added conditions, they'd start with select * from t where 1=1 and just add AND clauses after that.
select * from t where 1=1 and name = 'Bob' and salary > 20000
where 1=0, This is done to check if the table exists. Don't know why 1=1 is used.
While I can see that 1=1 would be useful for generated SQL, a technique I use in PHP is to create an array of clauses and then do
implode (" AND ", $clauses);
thus avoiding the problem of having a leading or trailing AND. Obviously this is only useful if you know that you are going to have at least one clause!
Here's a closely related example: using a SQL MERGE statement to update the target tabled using all values from the source table where there is no common attribute on which to join on e.g.
MERGE INTO Circles
USING
(
SELECT pi
FROM Constants
) AS SourceTable
ON 1 = 1
WHEN MATCHED THEN
UPDATE
SET circumference = 2 * SourceTable.pi * radius;
If you came here searching for WHERE 1, note that WHERE 1 and WHERE 1=1 are identical. WHERE 1 is used rarely because some database systems reject it considering WHERE 1 not really being boolean.
Why would someone use WHERE 1=1 AND <proper conditions>
I've seen homespun frameworks do stuff like this (blush), as this allows lazy parsing practices to be applied to both the WHERE and AND Sql keywords.
For example (I'm using C# as an example here), consider the conditional parsing of the following predicates in a Sql query string builder:
var sqlQuery = "SELECT * FROM FOOS WHERE 1 = 1"
if (shouldFilterForBars)
{
sqlQuery = sqlQuery + " AND Bars > 3";
}
if (shouldFilterForBaz)
{
sqlQuery = sqlQuery + " AND Baz < 12";
}
The "benefit" of WHERE 1 = 1 means that no special code is needed:
For AND - whether zero, one or both predicates (Bars and Baz's) should be applied, which would determine whether the first AND is required. Since we already have at least one predicate with the 1 = 1, it means AND is always OK.
For no predicates at all - In the case where there are ZERO predicates, then the WHERE must be dropped. But again, we can be lazy, because we are again guarantee of at least one predicate.
This is obviously a bad idea and would recommend using an established data access framework or ORM for parsing optional and conditional predicates in this way.
Having review all the answers i decided to perform some experiment like
SELECT
*
FROM MyTable
WHERE 1=1
Then i checked with other numbers
WHERE 2=2
WHERE 10=10
WHERE 99=99
ect
Having done all the checks, the query run town is the same. even without the where clause. I am not a fan of the syntax
This is useful in a case where you have to use dynamic query in which in where
clause you have to append some filter options. Like if you include options 0 for status is inactive, 1 for active. Based from the options, there is only two available options(0 and 1) but if you want to display All records, it is handy to include in where close 1=1.
See below sample:
Declare #SearchValue varchar(8)
Declare #SQLQuery varchar(max) = '
Select [FirstName]
,[LastName]
,[MiddleName]
,[BirthDate]
,Case
when [Status] = 0 then ''Inactive''
when [Status] = 1 then ''Active''
end as [Status]'
Declare #SearchOption nvarchar(100)
If (#SearchValue = 'Active')
Begin
Set #SearchOption = ' Where a.[Status] = 1'
End
If (#SearchValue = 'Inactive')
Begin
Set #SearchOption = ' Where a.[Status] = 0'
End
If (#SearchValue = 'All')
Begin
Set #SearchOption = ' Where 1=1'
End
Set #SQLQuery = #SQLQuery + #SearchOption
Exec(#SQLQuery);
Saw this in production code and asked seniors for help.
Their answer:
-We use 1=1 so when we have to add a new condition we can just type
and <condition>
and get on with it.
I do this usually when I am building dynamic SQL for a report which has many dropdown values a user can select. Since the user may or may not select the values from each dropdown, we end up getting a hard time figuring out which condition was the first where clause. So we pad up the query with a where 1=1 in the end and add all where clauses after that.
Something like
select column1, column2 from my table where 1=1 {name} {age};
Then we would build the where clause like this and pass it as a parameter value
string name_whereClause= ddlName.SelectedIndex > 0 ? "AND name ='"+ ddlName.SelectedValue+ "'" : "";
As the where clause selection are unknown to us at runtime, so this helps us a great deal in finding whether to include an 'AND' or 'WHERE'.
Making "where 1=1" the standard for all your queries also makes it trivially easy to validate the sql by replacing it with where 1 = 0, handy when you have batches of commands/files.
Also makes it trivially easy to find the end of the end of the from/join section of any query. Even queries with sub-queries if properly indented.
I first came across this back with ADO and classic asp, the answer i got was: performance.
if you do a straight
Select * from tablename
and pass that in as an sql command/text you will get a noticeable performance increase with the
Where 1=1
added, it was a visible difference. something to do with table headers being returned as soon as the first condition is met, or some other craziness, anyway, it did speed things up.
Using a predicate like 1=1 is a normal hint sometimes used to force the access plan to use or not use an index scan. The reason why this is used is when you are using a multi-nested joined query with many predicates in the where clause where sometimes even using all of the indexes causes the access plan to read each table - a full table scan. This is just 1 of many hints used by DBAs to trick a dbms into using a more efficient path. Just don't throw one in; you need a dba to analyze the query since it doesn't always work.
Here is a use case... however I am not too concerned with the technicalities of why I should or not use 1 = 1.
I am writing a function, using pyodbc to retrieve some data from SQL Server. I was looking for a way to force a filler after the where keyword in my code. This was a great suggestion indeed:
if _where == '': _where = '1=1'
...
...
...
cur.execute(f'select {predicate} from {table_name} where {_where}')
The reason is because I could not implement the keyword 'where' together inside the _where clause variable. So, I think using any dummy condition that evaluates to true would do as a filler.
I have an interesting situation where I'm trying to select everything in a sql server table but I only have to access the table through an old company API instead of SQL. This API asks for a table name, a field name, and a value. It then plugs it in rather straightforward in this way:
select * from [TABLE_NAME_VAR] where [FIELD_NAME_VAR] = 'VALUE_VAR';
I'm not able to change the = sign to != or anything else, only those vars. I know this sounds awful, but I cannot change the API without going through a lot of hoops and it's all I have to work with.
There are multiple columns in this table that are all numbers, all strings, and set to not null. Is there a value I can pass this API function that would return everything in the table? Perhaps a constant or special value that means it's a number, it's not a number, it's a string, *, it's not null, etc? Any ideas?
No this isn't possible if the API is constructed correctly.
If this is some home grown thing it may not be, however. You could try entering YourTable]-- as the value for TABLE_NAME_VAR such that when plugged into the query it ends up as
select * from [YourTable]--] where [FIELD_NAME_VAR] = 'VALUE_VAR';
If the ] is either rejected or properly escaped (by doubling it up) this won't work however.
You might try to pass this VALUE_VAR
1'' or ''''=''
If it's used as-is and executed as Dynamic SQL it should result in
SELECT * FROM tab WHERE fieldname = '1' or ''=''
here is a simple example,
hope it might help
declare #a varchar(max)
set #a=' ''1'' or 1=1 '
declare #b varchar(max)
set #b=('select * from [TABLE_NAME_VAR] where [FIELD_NAME_VAR]='+#a)
exec(#b)
If your API allows column name instead of constant,
select * from [TABLE_NAME_VAR] where [FIELD_NAME_VAR] = [FIELD_NAME_VAR] ;
I have a query here and I'm curious if there is a shorter way of writing this query, meaning to reduce the query from using an IF argument to determine if it should use the param or not in the statement. Please see below:
#Param varchar(10) = NULL
IF #Param IS NOT NULL
BEGIN
SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE Column = #Param
END
ELSE
BEGIN
SELECT * FROM TABLE
END
Could this be reduced to one simple query instead like this?
#Param varchar(10) = NULL
SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE Column = COALESCE( Any, #Param )
I looked at Coalesce, but didn't see if I could use an Any sort of feature. I hope this makes sense.
Question is how to acheive this. Second question is which would be better on performance?
There is no any style command, but if you use the #Param first and then the value in the column itself, that should work...
SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE Column = COALESCE(#Param, Column)
If #Param is Null then it is ignored and the next item in the list is used.
You can also use IsNull to do the same thing...
SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE Column = ISNULL(#Param, Column)
To answer the 2nd part of the question, my feeling is that using a separate statement will always be more efficient. The condensed version might be less code, but isn't necessarily easier to understand or quicker to run.
If you have a varchar field you can easily do SELECT * FROM TABLE WHERE ColumnA LIKE '%Test%' to see if that column contains a certain string.
How do you do that for XML Type?
I have the following which returns only rows that have a 'Text' node but I need to search within that node
select * from WebPageContent where data.exist('/PageContent/Text') = 1
Yet another option is to cast the XML as nvarchar, and then search for the given string as if the XML vas a nvarchar field.
SELECT *
FROM Table
WHERE CAST(Column as nvarchar(max)) LIKE '%TEST%'
I love this solution as it is clean, easy to remember, hard to mess up, and can be used as a part of a where clause.
This might not be the best performing solution, so think twice before deplying it to production. It is however very usefull for a quick debug session, which is where I mostly use it.
EDIT: As Cliff mentions it, you could use:
...nvarchar if there's characters that don't convert to varchar
You should be able to do this quite easily:
SELECT *
FROM WebPageContent
WHERE data.value('(/PageContent/Text)[1]', 'varchar(100)') LIKE 'XYZ%'
The .value method gives you the actual value, and you can define that to be returned as a VARCHAR(), which you can then check with a LIKE statement.
Mind you, this isn't going to be awfully fast. So if you have certain fields in your XML that you need to inspect a lot, you could:
create a stored function which gets the XML and returns the value you're looking for as a VARCHAR()
define a new computed field on your table which calls this function, and make it a PERSISTED column
With this, you'd basically "extract" a certain portion of the XML into a computed field, make it persisted, and then you can search very efficiently on it (heck: you can even INDEX that field!).
Marc
Another option is to search the XML as a string by converting it to a string and then using LIKE. However as a computed column can't be part of a WHERE clause you need to wrap it in another SELECT like this:
SELECT * FROM
(SELECT *, CONVERT(varchar(MAX), [COLUMNA]) as [XMLDataString] FROM TABLE) x
WHERE [XMLDataString] like '%Test%'
This is what I am going to use based on marc_s answer:
SELECT
SUBSTRING(DATA.value('(/PAGECONTENT/TEXT)[1]', 'VARCHAR(100)'),PATINDEX('%NORTH%',DATA.value('(/PAGECONTENT/TEXT)[1]', 'VARCHAR(100)')) - 20,999)
FROM WEBPAGECONTENT
WHERE COALESCE(PATINDEX('%NORTH%',DATA.value('(/PAGECONTENT/TEXT)[1]', 'VARCHAR(100)')),0) > 0
Return a substring on the search where the search criteria exists
I have a table with 10 columns as col_1,col_2,.... col_10. I want to write a select statement that will select a value of one of the row and from one of these 10 columns. I have a variable that will decide which column to select from. Can such query be written where the column name is dynamically decided from a variable.
Yes, using a CASE statement:
SELECT CASE #MyVariable
WHEN 1 THEN [Col_1]
WHEN 2 THEN [Col_2]
...
WHEN 10 THEN [Col_10]
END
Whether this is a good idea is another question entirely. You should use better names than Col_1, Col_2, etc.
You could also use a string substitution method, as suggested by others. However, that is an option of last resort because it can open up your code to sql injection attacks.
Sounds like a bad, denormalized design to me.
I think a better one would have the table as parent, with rows that contain a foreign key to a separate child table that contains ten rows, one for each of those columns you have now. Let the parent table set the foreign key according to that magic value when the row is inserted or updated in the parent table.
If the child table is fairly static, this will work.
Since I don't have enough details, I can't give code. Instead, I'll explain.
Declare a string variable, something like:
declare #sql varchar(5000)
Set that variable to be the completed SQL string you want (as a string, and not actually querying... so you embed the row-name you want using string concatenation).
Then call: exec(#sql)
All set.
I assume you are running purely within Transact-SQL. What you'll need to do is dynamically create the SQL statement with your variable as the column name and use the EXECUTE command to run it. For example:
EXECUTE('select ' + #myColumn + ' from MyTable')
You can do it with a T-SQl CASE statement:
SELECT 'The result' =
CASE
WHEN choice = 1 THEN col1
WHEN choice = 2 THEN col2
...
END
FROM sometable
IMHO, Joel Coehoorn's case statement is probably the best idea
... but if you really have to use dynamic SQL, you can do it with sp_executeSQL()
I have no idea what platform you are using but you can use Dynamic LINQ pretty easily to do this.
var query = context.Table
.Where( t => t.Id == row_id )
.Select( "Col_" + column_id );
IEnumerator enumerator = query.GetEnumerator();
enumerator.MoveNext();
object columnValue = enumerator.Current;
Presumably, you'll know which actual type to cast this to depending on the column. The nice thing about this is you get the parameterized query for free, protecting you against SQL injection attacks.
This isn't something you should ever need to do if your database is correctly designed. I'd revisit the design of that element of the schema to remove the need to do this.