I am using APEX collections to store some values and pass them between pages in Oracle Application Express 4.2.3.
I would like to then perform an update statement on a table called "project" with the values from the collection.
My code so far is as follows:
update project
SET name=c.c002,
description=c.c007,
start_date=c.c004,
timeframe=c.c005,
status=c.c009
FROM
apex_collections c
WHERE
c.collection_name = 'PROJECT_DETAILS_COLLECTION'
and id = :p14_id;
where :p14_id is the value of a page item.
However, I am getting the following error:
ORA-00933: SQL command not properly ended
Anyone have any idea on how to approach this?
Thanks!
The UPDATE syntax you are using is not valid in Oracle; it does not allow you to use FROM in the way you are attempting.
The simplest way to do this in Oracle would with a subquery:
update project
set (name, description, start_date, timeframe, status) =
(select c.c002, c.c007, c.c004, c.c005, c.c009
FROM
apex_collections c
WHERE
c.collection_name = 'PROJECT_DETAILS_COLLECTION'
)
WHERE
id = :p14_id
;
Note that if the subquery returns no rows, the columns in the target table will be updated to NULL; this could be avoided by adding a similar EXISTS condition in the predicate for the update. It could also be avoided by using a MERGE statement instead of an UPDATE.
If the subquery returns multiple rows, the statement will throw an error. It looks like tthat should not be the case here.
Related
So perhaps the title is a little confusing. If you can suggest better wording for that please let me know and i'll update.
Here's the issue. I've got a table with many thousands of rows and i need to update a few thousand of those many to store latest email data.
For example:
OldEmail#1.com => NewEmail#1.com
OldEmail#2.com => NewEmail#2.com
I've got a list of old emails ('OldEmail#1.com','OldEmail#2.com') and a list of the new ('NewEmail#1.com','NewEmail#2.com'). The HOPE was was to sort of do it simply with something like
UPDATE Table
SET Email = ('NewEmail#1.com','NewEmail#2.com')
WHERE Email = ('OldEmail#1.com','OldEmail#2.com')
I hope that makes sense. Any questions just ask. Thanks!
You could use a case expression:
update mytable
set email = case email
when 'OldEmail#1.com' then 'NewEmail#1.com'
when 'OldEmail#2.com' then 'NewEmail#2.com'
end
where email in ('OldEmail#1.com','OldEmail#2.com')
Or better yet, if you have a large list of values, you might create a table to store them (like myref(old_email, new_email)) and join it in your update query, like so:
update t
set t.email = r.new_email
from mytable t
inner join myref r on r.old_email = t.email
The actual syntax for update/join does vary accross databases - the above SQL Server syntax.
With accuracy to the syntax in particular DBMS:
WITH cte AS (SELECT 'NewEmail#1.com' newvalue, 'OldEmail#1.com' oldvalue
UNION ALL
SELECT 'NewEmail#2.com', 'OldEmail#2.com')
UPDATE table
SET table.email = cte.newvalue
FROM cte
WHERE table.email = cte.oldvalue
or, if CTE is not available,
UPDATE table
SET table.email = cte.newvalue
FROM (SELECT 'NewEmail#1.com' newvalue, 'OldEmail#1.com' oldvalue
UNION ALL
SELECT 'NewEmail#2.com', 'OldEmail#2.com') cte
WHERE table.email = cte.oldvalue
Consider prepared statement for rows update in large batches.
Basically it works as following :
database complies a query pattern you provide the first time, keep the compiled result for current connection (depends on implementation).
then you updates all the rows, by sending shortened label of the prepared function with different parameters in SQL syntax, instead of sending entire UPDATE statement several times for several updates
the database parse the shortened label of the prepared function , which is linked to the pre-compiled result, then perform the updates.
next time when you perform row updates, the database may still use the pre-compiled result and quickly complete the operations (so the first step above can be skipped).
Here is PostgreSQL example of prepare statement, many of SQL databases (e.g. MariaDB,MySQL, Oracle) also support it.
I'm trying to do an update query in which a single row the table is updated and, if nothing has matched and updated, a new row is inserted. In each case, I need the query to return the ID of the inserted row.
The issue I'm having is this query is returning 2 separate results when the insert case is reached, one for each output (the first empty, the second containing the ID). I'm running this query using SQL Alchemy on python and I'm only able to see the first result, which is empty.
UPDATE [Rights]
SET accessLevel = :access_level
OUTPUT inserted.rightsID
WHERE principal = :principal and [function] = :function
IF ##ROWCOUNT = 0
INSERT INTO Rights(principal, [function], accessLevel)
OUTPUT inserted.rightsID
VALUES(:principal, :function, :access_level)
And I'm calling it like so:
inserted_right_id = session.execute(sql_rights_update, right).fetchall()
Can anyone recommend a way of changing the query so that I can still use the UPSERT method, but only receive one of the IDs? I was considering storing the OUTPUT values into a table and returning that, or wrapping the whole thing in a select but hopefully there's something more elegant out there.
Thanks a million.
Feeling quite dumb. I simply added a
IF EXISTS(SELECT * FROM Rights WHERE principal = :principal and [function] = :function)
UPDATE ...
ELSE
INSERT ...
I have a table with grouped tasks:
tt_plan_task_id is the id
records with tt_plantype=1 represent 'groups'
tasks in/under a group have a tt_group_id pointing to the tt_plan_task_id
there are tasks that don't belong to a group (tt_group_id is null)
groups nest multiple levels
I need to fix (update) the tt_fromdate field values for the group records if they do not match the min(tt_fromdate) from the underlying tasks (they always have a value).
To fix them all I could do
update tt_plan_task g
set tt_fromdate=
(select min(t.tt_fromdate) from tt_plan_task t
where (t.tt_group_id=g.tt_plan_task_id))
where (g.tt_plantype=1)
This statement avoids the UPDATE FROM syntax that I see in many (SQL server) answers - Firebird does not support that.
There are 2 complications
I want to do the update only if g.tt_fromdate <> min(t.tt_fromdate), so I would have to add a reference to min(tt_fromdate) to the outer where.
I tried using an alias for the aggregate and referencing that but that got me nowhere (syntax errors)
SQL Server does not like the table alias in the update, but solutions like these use the UPDATE FROM syntax again ;-( How do I work around that then?
How do I tie 1. and 2. into my update statement so that it works?
As noted in the title, this needs to execute in SQL Server, Oracle, and Firebird
Note: Since groups can contain groups, the update should ideally be executed 'from the bottom up', i.e. deepest groups first.
But since this is just a rough correction for a corrupt database, doing one 'lineair' pass over all groups is good enough.
To get around SQL Server's non-standard way for update table aliases, simply don't use any.
As to using the aggregate result in both the SET clause and the WHERE clause, I suppose the only way all DBMS work with, is to write the aggregation query twice.
update tt_plan_task
set tt_fromdate =
(
select min(t.tt_fromdate)
from tt_plan_task t
where t.tt_group_id = tt_plan_task.tt_plan_task_id
)
where (tt_plantype=1)
and
(
tt_fromdate <>
(
select min(t.tt_fromdate)
from tt_plan_task t
where t.tt_group_id = tt_plan_task.tt_plan_task_id
)
);
I want to write a update SQL statement, but one conidtion of this statement is the result from a select SQL statement, and I also want to return the result of the select SQL statement.
Like this: update ... set ... where id = (select id from ...)
I want to return the value of id back.
Does anybody know how should I do this?
Thanks in advance!
I don't believe that's possible in one statement. Update then query (select) the new value, or query the value first, and then submit an update.
Alternative would be a stored procedure on the database, which executes the multiple queries and returns the result for you.
This is not possible in all Java database frameworks that I know. Probably you need to separate your query and update in Java.
I don't see any problem in using a subselect in a WHERE clause of an update statement.
For the second request, getting back the value of id, I know this is possible in DB2, and maybe others implement that syntax too:
SELECT id FROM FINAL TABLE (
update ... set ... where id = (select id from ...)
)
This works also for INSERT and DELETE statements. (See the documentation.)
Update statements won't return the updated datasets. The select in that case would be a subselect that isn't directly accessible.
You'd thus have to use at least two queries:
select the ids you want
call the update query passing the previously selected ids as a parameter
I have written this query:
UPDATE tbl_stock1 SET
tbl_stock1.weight1 = (
select (b.weight1 - c.weight_in_gram) as temp
from
tbl_stock1 as b,
tbl_sales_item as c
where
b.item_submodel_id = c.item_submodel_id
and b.item_submodel_id = tbl_stock1.item_submodel_id
and b.status <> 'D'
and c.status <> 'D'
),
tbl_stock1.qty1 = (
select (b.qty1 - c.qty) as temp1
from
tbl_stock1 as b,
tbl_sales_item as c
where
b.item_submodel_id = c.item_submodel_id
and b.item_submodel_id = tbl_stock1.item_submodel_id
and b.status <> 'D'
and c.status <> 'D'
)
WHERE
tbl_stock1.item_submodel_id = 'ISUBM/1'
and tbl_stock1.status <> 'D';
I got this error message:
Operation must use an updatable query. (Error 3073) Microsoft Access
But if I run the same query in SQL Server it will be executed.
Thanks,
dinesh
I'm quite sure the JET DB Engine treats any query with a subquery as non-updateable. This is most likely the reason for the error and, thus, you'll need to rework the logic and avoid the subqueries.
As a test, you might also try to remove the calculation (the subtraction) being performed in each of the two subqueries. This calculation may not be playing nicely with the update as well.
Consider this very simple UPDATE statement using Northwind:
UPDATE Categories
SET Description = (
SELECT DISTINCT 'Anything'
FROM Employees
);
It fails with the error 'Operation must use an updateable query'.
The Access database engine simple does not support the SQL-92 syntax using a scalar subquery in the SET clause.
The Access database engine has its own proprietary UPDATE..JOIN..SET syntax but is unsafe because, unlike a scalar subquery, it doesn’t require values to be unambiguous. If values are ambiguous then the engine silent 'picks' one arbitrarily and it is hard (if not impossible) to predict which one will be applied even if you were aware of the problem.
For example, consider the existing Categories table in Northwind and the following daft (non-)table as a target for an update (daft but simple to demonstrate the problem clearly):
CREATE TABLE BadCategories
(
CategoryID INTEGER NOT NULL,
CategoryName NVARCHAR(15) NOT NULL
)
;
INSERT INTO BadCategories (CategoryID, CategoryName)
VALUES (1, 'This one...?')
;
INSERT INTO BadCategories (CategoryID, CategoryName)
VALUES (1, '...or this one?')
;
Now for the UPDATE:
UPDATE Categories
INNER JOIN (
SELECT T1.CategoryID, T1.CategoryName
FROM Categories AS T1
UNION ALL
SELECT 9 - T2.CategoryID, T2.CategoryName
FROM Categories AS T2
) AS DT1
ON DT1.CategoryID = Categories.CategoryID
SET Categories.CategoryName = DT1.CategoryName;
When I run this I'm told that two rows have been updated, funny because there's only one matching row in the Categories table. The result is that the Categories table with CategoryID now has the '...or this one?' value. I suspect it has been a race to see which value gets written to the table last.
The SQL-92 scalar subquery is verbose when there are multiple clauses in the SET and/or the WHERE clause matches the SET's clauses but at least it eliminates ambiguity (plus a decent optimizer should be able to detects that the subqueries are close matches). The SQL-99 Standard introduced MERGE which can be used to eliminate the aforementioned repetition but needless to say Access doesn't support that either.
The Access database engine's lack of support for the SQL-92 scalar subquery syntax is for me its worst 'design feature' (read 'bug').
Also note the Access database engine's proprietary UPDATE..JOIN..SET syntax cannot anyhow be used with set functions ('totals queries' in Access-speak). See Update Query Based on Totals Query Fails.
Keep in mind that if you copy over a query that originally had queries or summary queries as part of the query, even though you delete those queries and only have linked tables, the query will (mistakenly) act like it still has non-updateable fields and will give you this error. You just simply re-create the query as you want it but it is an insidious little glitch.
You are updating weight1 and qty1 with values that are in turn derived from weight1 and qty1 (respectively). That's why MS-Access is choking on the update. It's probably also doing some optimisation in the background.
The way I would get around this is to dump the calculations into a temporary table, and then update the first table from the temporary table.
There is no error in the code. But the error is Thrown because of the following reason.
Please check weather you have given Read-write permission to MS-Access database file.
The Database file where it is stored (say in Folder1) is read-only..?
suppose you are stored the database (MS-Access file) in read only folder, while running your application the connection is not force-fully opened. Hence change the file permission / its containing folder permission like in C:\Program files all most all c drive files been set read-only so changing this permission solves this Problem.
In the query properties, try changing the Recordset Type to Dynaset (Inconsistent Updates)