I need verify that all cells in column contain data in only date format. How it possible to verify?
*I think it isn't LIKE function.
DATE doesn't have any format. What you see is for display purpose so that it could be easily interpreted.
DATE datatype is stored in a proprietary format internally in 7 bytes. It is a bad idea and makes no sense to verify the format while date is stored in an internal format. As I said, format is only for display.
If the date column is not a DATE data type, then it is a design flaw. And, any application based on such a flawed database design is on the verge to break anytime.
Storing DATE values other than date data type is just like not understanding the basics.
You should first fix the design to get a permanent solution. Any solution to your question is just another workaround.
Let me show a small example how it creates even more confusion.
The following date :
01/02/2015
Is it:
1st Feb 2015 or,
2nd Jan 2015
There is no way to tell that. It could be either DD or MM. This being just one among so many other problems due to the incorrect data type.
Store date values as DATE data type only, period.
Based on your last question, I think you are looking for something like this:
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ...
WHERE NOT REGEXP_LIKE (A, '^XXX/MOSCOW/XXXMSX/[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}$')
If count is greater than zero, something doesn't match. If you want more detail on what doesn't match, change your SELECT clause appropriately.
If you are looking for multiple date formats, you can change your regular expression appropriately. The | operator in most flavors of regular expression, including Oracle's, lets you define multiple patterns in the same space. You might use something like
SELECT COUNT(*) FROM ...
WHERE NOT
REGEXP_LIKE (A,
'^XXX/MOSCOW/XXXMSX/[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}$|^[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{2}-[0-9]{2}$')
adding as many different matching patterns as you need.
Try
SELECT *
FROM POL
WHERE NOT REGEXP_LIKE(TR_KRY, '^(0[1-9]|([1-2][0-9])|30|31)-(([0][1-9])|10|11|12)-[0-9]{4}$')
This will return you all rows where TR_KRY is not formatted as 'DD-MM-YYYY', where DD is '01'-'31', MM is '01'-'12', and YYYY is any four numeric digits.
As others have said, storing dates as character strings is not a good idea. In the field you're looking at, it might be that the date is stored as DD-MM-YYYY (day-month-year - the usual case in Europe and perhaps elsewhere), or it might be that the date is stored as MM-DD-YYYY (month-day-year - a common practice in the US). If possible, I suggest you should convert this field to the DATE data type so that the TO_CHAR function can be used to produce a text version of the date in whatever format is desired.
Given the example data you've shown in comments (and that's also not good practice - you should go back and edit the question when you want to include additional information) it appears the dates are formatted as DD-MM-YYYY and I've set up the regular expression above to deal with this as best as possible.
Related
I have an nvarchar(100) column which has a value ' 8/11/2022'.
I receive and error when trying to convert it to date...
select convert(date,[date],103)
from [Source].[TableName] s_p
--Msg 241, Level 16, State 1, Line 96
--Conversion failed when converting date and/or time from character string.
I have tried a number of different ways to approach but I can't find one to give me '08/11/2022'
select Date = REPLACE(LEFT([Date],10),' ','0')
from [Source].[TableName] s_p
--Outcome 8/11/2022
select REPLACE([DATE],' 8/','08/')
from [Source].[TableName] s_p
--Outcome 8/11/2022
select convert(nvarchar,[date],103)
from [Source].[TableName] s_p
--Outcome 8/11/2022
The strange thing is when I copy and paste from the results grid then do a replace it works fine...
select REPLACE(' 8/11/2022',' 8/','08/')
--Outcome 08/11/2022
Please help me to get to '08/11/2022' or any single digit to having a leading 0.
Thanks, Will
Different languages and cultures have their own formatting preferences around date values. Some places like M/dd/yyyy. Some places like dd/MM/yyyy. Or perhaps d-M-YYYY (different separators and conventions around leading zeros). The point is it's not okay to go into a place and impose our own preferences and norms on that culture.
The SQL language is no different. It really is it's own language, and as such has it's own expectations around date handling. If you violate these expectations, you should not be surprised when there are misunderstandings as a result.
The first expectation is for date and datetime values to be stored in datetime columns. It's hard to understate how much of a difference this can make for performance and correctness.
But let's assume that's not an option, and you have no choice but to use a string column like varchar or nvarchar. In that situation, there is still an expectation around how date values should be formatted.
Any database will do better if you use a format which stores the date parts in order by descending length. For example, ISO-8601 yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:sss[.fff] This is important to allow greater than/less than comparisons to work, it can greatly help with indexes and performance, and it makes cast/convert operations to datetime values MUCH more likely to succeed and be accurate.
For SQL Server specifically, there are three acceptable formats:
yyyy-MM-ddTHH:mm:sss[.fff],
yyyyMMdd HH:mm:ss[.fff], and
yyyyMMdd.
Anything else WILL have date values that don't parse as expected. Any string manipulation done to call the CONVERT() method should focus on reaching one of these formats.
With that in mind, and assuming 8/11/2022 means November 8 and not August 11 (given the 103 convert format), you need something like this:
convert(datetime,
right([date], charindex('/', reverse([date]))-1) -- year
+ right('0' + replace(substring([date], charindex('/', [date])+1, 2), '/', ''), 2) -- month
+ right('0' + left([date], charindex('/',[date])-1),2) -- day
)
And you can see it work here:
https://dbfiddle.uk/lM8sVySh
Yes, that's a lot of code. It's also gonna be more than a little slow. And again, the reason why it's so slow and complicated is you jumped in with your own cultural expectations and failed to respect the language of the platform you're using.
Finally, I need to question the premise. As the fiddle above shows, SQL Server is perfectly happy to convert this specific value without error. This tells me you probably have more rows, and any error is in fact coming from a different row.
With that in mind, one thing to remember is a WHERE clause condition will not necessarily run or filter a table before a CONVERT() operation in the SELECT clause. That is, if you have many different kinds of value in this table, you cannot guarantee your CONVERT() expression will only run on the date values, no matter what kind of WHERE clause you have. Databases do not guarantee order of operations in this way.
The problem could also be some invisible unicode whitespace.
Another possibility is date formats. Most cultures that prefer a leading day, instead of month or year, tend to also strongly prefer to see the leading 0 in the first place. That the zero is missing here makes me wonder if you might have a number of dates in the column that were formatted by, say, Americans. So then you try to parse a column with values both like 02/13/2022 and 13/02/2022. Obviously those dates can't both use the same format, since there is no 13th month.
In that case, best of luck to you, because you no longer have any way to know for certain whether 2/3/2022 means March 2nd or February 3rd... and trying to guess (by say, assuming your own common format) is just exacerbating the same mistake that got you into this mess in the first place.
It's worth noting all three of these possibilities would be avoided had you used DateTime columns from the beginning.
You'll want to use LPAD to add 0 to string, then CAST() string as date if you want to change to date data type
I want to create a column of data type having only 'mm-dd' values.
Is it possible and if yes how should I do it?
Note: Instead of "2022-06-07", I want "07-06"
There is no date type that can store that format - in fact none of the date types store a date and/or time in any of the formats you typically recognize.
For your specific requirement, that looks like a char(5) for the data type, but how you constrain it so that it will only accept valid date values, I have no idea. You'd think this would work:
CHECK (TRY_CONVERT(date, string_column + '-2022', 105) IS NOT NULL)
But what about leap years? February 29th is sometimes valid, but you've thrown away the only information that can make you sure. What a bunch of mess to store your favorite string and trust that people aren't putting garbage in there.
Honestly I would store the date as a date, then you can just have a computed column (or a column in a view, or just do this at query time:
d_slash_m_column AS CONVERT(char(5), date_column, 105)
Why not just in your query (or only in a view) say:
[output] = CONVERT(char(5), data_in_the_right_type, 105)
?
I'd personally stay away from FORMAT(), for reasons I've described here:
FORMAT() is nice and all, but…
FORMAT is a convenient but expensive function - Part 1
FORMAT is a convenient but expensive function - Part 2
You can use the SQL Server FORMAT function:
FORMAT(col1, 'dd/MM')
Check the demo here.
In such cases using char or varchar is not the best option as in those cases the underlying DB constraints that validate the integrity of the data do not kick in.
Best option is to use an arbitrary year and then put in a proper date, so for example for storing 01-Jan, the db column should store proper date with year as any arbitrary value, e.g. 2000. So your db should say 2000-01-01.
With such a solution you are still able to rely on the DB to raise an error if you tried month 13. Similarly sorting will work naturally as well.
I have written a program that logs events into a db file as they happen using SQL statement. Whenever I open the table to view, I specifically request the dataset in descending order based on ALARM's date and time. It seems to work only for part of the table. I am using SQLite3 and my program is written in delphi or Pascal.
Here is the SQL statement:
SELECT *
FROM Alarms
ORDER BY datetime(ALARMTIME) DESC
Here is a snapshot of the table. Pay attention to the red arrows. That's where Alarm's date and time doesn't follow descending order. I don't know why this is happening.
I'm not sure how you created your date/time string in your database since that information wasn't given in the question. However, according to the documentation for the datetime() function, the format you have of MM/DD/YYYY HH:MM:SS xx is not one of the accepted formats. In fact, if you do SELECT datetime('1/23/2018 01:40:00 PM') at an SQLite prompt, you get NULL. Whereas, if you use an acceptable format, you do not: SELECT datetime('2018-01-23') gives '2018-01-23 00:00:00'.
So I think the solution is to write the ALARMTIME field using datetime('now'), which does yield a format accepted by datetime(). If you need to sort based upon the format you have now, you can't do it with datetime(). You'd need to reformat the field using string functions to get it in a form you could do a string compare with (e.g., as is done here).
The OP has indicated in a comment that the ALARMTIME is set using the following Pascal code:
FieldByName('AlarmTime').AsDateTime := now;
There's no guarantee that Pascal is going to use a date/time string format in this context that is compatible with SQLite's datetime() function. So Pascal date/time formatting functions can be used to create a format more specifically acceptable by SQLite's datetime(). Then you'd use something like:
FieldByName('AlarmTime').AsString := FormatDateTime('YYYY-MM-DD hh:nn:ss',now);
Now this will change the default view of the date to YYYY-MM-DD .... If you still want your view of the table to show MM/DD/YYYY... then you'll either need to go back to my prior comment about processing the string on the fly in the comparison for sort, or write a little view formatting code so that it displays in a format that's different than what is stored internally, which is a common view/model separation technique.
If you can write your original ALARMTIME format as MM/DD/YYYY and make sure you pre-pad with zeroes (e.g., 01/09/2018 not 1/9/2018) then you can use SQLite's substr function:
SELECT * FROM Alarms
ORDER BY (substr(ALARMTIME,7,4)||substr(ALARMTIME,1,2)||substr(ALARMTIME,4,2)||substr(ALARMTIME,11)) DESC
And you would create your ALARMTIME using this:
FieldByName('AlarmTime').AsString := FormatDateTime('dd-mm-yyyy hh:nn:ss', now);
The above solutions are fairly generic. Depending upon the client library you are using (which you have not specified), there may be another more suitable approach to solving the problem.
You cannot do, for example, SELECT * FROM Alarms ORDER BY ALARMTIME DESC and get an accurate sort since, for example, the date 12/1/2018 would come after 2/1/2018 in that sort ordering even though 2/1/2018 is later in time. This is because 2 follows 1 in the ASCII collating sequence.
If you need to keep your current ALARMTIME string format and not change how you're saving it, which is somewhat free form m/d/yyyy in which the day or month can have one or two digits, you're going to have a bit of work to do in order to sort it if your client library doesn't support some helpers in this regard. Perhaps your only other option would be to use a custom SQLite function. These are written in C and compiled and linked with SQLite. You'd have to find one already written, or write your own.
I have a variable "month" in SQL DB with 2 different formats: yyyy-mm and yyyy-m (e.g., 2015-11, 2016-1). When I try to sort the 'month" (ascending or descending), it is not showing properly due to this format difference. How to change the yyyy-m format to yyyy-mm?
If you can be certain that it's never going to be anything other than those exact formats you can insert a zero at a known point in the string -
SELECT MonthField,
CASE WHEN LEN(MonthField)=6 THEN
LEFT(MonthField,5)+'0' + RIGHT(MonthField,1)
ELSE MonthField
END AS MonthField_Cleaned
FROM SourceTable
But if at all possible you'd be better off cleaning whatever's creating the data, and ideally storing the data as actual dates rather than strings representing the months to ensure they can't get mixed up and you can use the DBMS' date manipulation functions.
There is a problem in VBA text box while filling input mask property:
I am trying to make the combination of date and time:
Hence i put it like below:
00/00/00;0;_00:00;0;_
But while running the application, i am only getting 00/00/00 (Date).
But i remember, i got the result as like 00/00/00 00.00 as expected when i first put the expression as like above;
but now i am not getting it :-(
The InputMask property can contain up to three sections separated by semicolons (;)
Your mask should be like this:
"00/00/00 00:00;0;0"
or
"00/00/00 00:00;0;_" // to display it like __/__/__ __:__
Why not just use the built in "General Date" format? I've found over the years that input masks are very restricting and basically a pain. Although it's been so long since I've used them that I don't recall the details of why I despise them.
This also has the benefit of respecting the users choices of regional date format. For example I always use yyyy-mm-dd format.
Also a client had a situation where the date format was decreed to be Medium Date on all fields. Which is dd-mmm-yy. It later turned out that in a table of 100K records there were twelve dates before 1900. They had simple had something extra keyed in in the year so Windows/Access interpreted those dates as being in the 3rd or 5th century or whatever. Now these dates weren't used in any kind of calculation so it wasn't a big deal. SQL Server upsizing to small date/time fields didn't appreciate those though.