I'm trying to append two tables in MS Access at the moment. This is my SQL View of my Query at the moment:
INSERT INTO MainTable
SELECT
FROM Table1 INNER JOIN Table2 ON Table1.University = Table2.University;
Where "University" is the only field name that would have similarities between the two tables. When I try and run the query, I get this error:
Query must have at least one destination field.
I assumed that the INSERT INTO MainTable portion of my SQL was defining the destination, but apparently I am wrong. How can I specify my destination?
You must select something from your select statement.
INSERT INTO MainTable
SELECT col1, col2
FROM Table1 INNER JOIN Table2 ON Table1.University = Table2.University;
Besides Luke Ford's answer (which is correct), there's another gotcha to consider:
MS Access (at least Access 2000, where I just tested it) seems to match the columns by name.
In other words, when you execute the query from Luke's answer:
INSERT INTO MainTable
SELECT col1, col2
FROM ...
...MS Access assumes that MainTable has two columns named col1 and col2, and tries to insert col1 from your query into col1 in MainTable, and so on.
If the column names in MainTable are different, you need to specify them in the INSERT clause.
Let's say the columns in MainTable are named foo and bar, then the query needs to look like this:
INSERT INTO MainTable (foo, bar)
SELECT col1, col2
FROM ...
As other users have mentioned, your SELECT statement is empty. If you'd like to select more that just col1, col2, however, that is possible. If you want to select all columns in your two tables that are to be appended, you can use SELECT *, which will select everything in the tables.
Related
I have been busting my head for some time already and without any result.
Honestly I think that I need fresh eyes on this query.
I have written a query that deletes data from one table and puts it into another table. What I can't really figure out, is how to update one column for those rows I am moving, within the same query.
Here is how the query looks:
INSERT table1_archive
SELECT * FROM (
DELETE table
OUTPUT
DELETED.*
WHERE <condition1>
) AS RowsToMove;
What I want is to add also
UPDATE table1 SET <my_column> = "" WHERE <condition1>
Since it is the same condition and table for delete and update, I was thinking that it makes no sense to call two different queries to do some actions for exactly the same rows.
What I want is to clear data out of the <my_column> either before moving rows to table1_archive, or after doing so.
I guess my question is: How would I apply this update statement to the selected rows I am about to insert into the table1_archive?
ANSWER
This question becomes a little redundant as the UPDATE statement was not necessary to achieve what I wanted. I could just list all my columns in the SELECT statement and replace the <my_column> with NULL, or '''.
You can simply manipulate the column to be updated in the select statement.
INSERT INTO table1_archive
SELECT Col1,Col2...,"" AS <my_column> FROM (
DELETE table
OUTPUT
DELETED.*
WHERE <condition1>
) AS RowsToMove;
You can do this in a single statement - but it requires that you enumerate the columns.
Assuming that your tables have columns (col1, col2, col3, mycol), where mycol should be set to null when copied to the archive, you would write this as:
with del as (
delete ...
output deleted.*
where ...
)
insert into table1_archive (col1, col2, col3, mycol)
select col1, col2, col3, null
from del
and also you can try this solution
UPDATE example_table1 table1 ,
(SELECT
my_column1, my_column2
FROM example_table2
WHERE
table1.my_column3=<condition1>
) table2
SET
table1.my_column1 = table2.my_column1,
table1.my_column2 = table2.my_column2
where table1.ID = table2.ID
UPDATE table1 SET
table1.my_column1= table2.my_column1
FROM
example_table1 AS table1
INNER JOIN example_table2 AS table2
ON table1.ID = table2.ID
WHERE
table1.my_column2 = <condition1>
I have two caches, and I did a join between these two caches. Then what is the recommended/efficient way to save the result of this join query into the 3rd cache?
I would like not to do it by iterating over the query result and put each into the cache,but would like to use sql like
insert into thirdcache select colomns from firstcache join secondcache
You can use "insert from select" sql query, but you should specify fields to be updated in insert part and also types of these fields should be equals to corresponding columns types returned by select part.
Smth like this:
insert into t1 (colA, colB) (Select t2.colX, t2.colY from t2);
where colA type equal to colX and etc.
Suppose I have 2 tables, each tables has N columns. There are NO duplicate rows in table1
And now we want to know what datasets in table2 (including duplicates) are also contained in table1.
I tried
select * from table1
intersect
select * from table2
But this only gives me unique rows that are in both tables. But I don't want unique rows, are want to see all rows in table2 that are in table1...
Keep in mind!! I cannot do
select *
from table1 a, table b
where a.table1col = b.table2col
...because I don't know the number of columns of the tables at runtime.
Sure I could do something with dynamic SQL and iterate over the column numbers but I'm asking this precisely because it seems too simple a query for that kind of stuff..
Example:
create table table1 (table1col int)
create table table2 (table2col int)
insert into table1 values (8)
insert into table1 values (7)
insert into table2 values (1)
insert into table2 values (8)
insert into table2 values (7)
insert into table2 values (7)
insert into table2 values (2)
insert into table2 values (9)
I want my query then to return:
8
7
7
If the amount of columns is not know, you will have to resort to a value computed over a row to make a match.
One such function is CHECKSUM.
Returns the checksum value computed over a row of a table, or over a
list of expressions. CHECKSUM is intended for use in building hash
indices.
SQL Statement
SELECT tm.*
FROM (
SELECT CS = CHECKSUM(*)
FROM Table2
) tm
INNER JOIN (
SELECT CS = CHECKSUM(*)
FROM Table2
INTERSECT
SELECT CHECKSUM(*)
FROM Table1
) ti ON ti.CS = tm.CS
Note that CHECKSUM might introduce collisions. You will have to test for that before doing any operation on your data.
Edit
In case you are using SQL Server 2005, you might make this a bit more robust by throwing in HASH_BYTES.
The downside of HASH_BYTESis that you need to specify the columns on which you want to operate but for all the columns you do known up-front, you could use this to prevent collisions.
EXCEPT vs INTERSECT - link
EXCEPT returns any distinct values from the left query that are not also found on the right query.
INTERSECT returns any distinct values that are returned by both the query on the left and right sides of the INTERSECT operand.
Maybe EXCEPT can solve your problem
I have one mdb table with the following structure:
Field1 Field2 Field3 Field4
A ...
B ...
I try to use a query to list all the different fields of row A and B in a result-set:
SELECT * From Table1
WHERE Field1 = 'A'
UNION
SELECT * From Table1
WHERE Field1 = 'B';
However this query has two problems:
it list all the fields including the
identical cells, with a large table
it gives out an error message: too
many fields defined.
How could i get around these issues?
Is it not easiest to just select all fields needed from the table, based on the Field1 value and group on the values needed?
So something like this:
SELECT field1, field2,...field195
FROM Table1
WHERE field1 = 'A' or field1 = 'B'
GROUP BY field1, field2, ....field195
This will give you all rows where field1 is A or B and there is a difference in one of the selected fields.
Oh and for the group by statement as well as the SELECT part, indeed use the previously mentioned edit mode for the query. There you can add all fields (by selecting them in the table and dragging them down) that are needed in the result, then click the 'totals' button in the ribbon to add the group by- statements for all. Then you only have to add the Where-clause and you are done.
Now that the question is more clear (you want the query to select fields instead of records based on the particular requirements), I'll have to change my answer to:
This is not possible.
(untill proven otherwise) ;)
As far as I know, a query is used to select records using for example the where clause, never used to determine which fields should be shown depending on a certain criterium.
One thing that MIGHT help in this case is to look at the database design. Are those tables correctly made?
Suppose you have 190 of those fields that are merely details of the main data. You could separate this in another table, so you have a main table and details table.
The details table could look something like:
ID ID_Main Det_desc Det_value
This way you can filter all Detail values that are equal between the two main values A and B using something like:
Select a.det_desc, a.det_value, b.det_value
(Select Det_desc, det_value
from tblDetails
where id_main = a) as A inner join
(Select Det_desc, det_value
from tblDetails
where id_main = a) as B
on A.det_desc = B.det_desc and A.det_value <> B.det_value
This you can join with your main table again if needed.
You can full join the table on itself, matching identical rows. Then you can filter on mismatches if one of the two join parts is null. For example:
select *
from (
select *
from Table1
where Field1 = 'A'
) A
full join
(
select *
from Table1
where Field1 = 'B'
) B
on A.Field2 = B.Field2
and A.Field3 = B.Field3
where A.Field1 is null
or B.Field1 is null
If you have 200 fields, ask Access to generate the column list by creating a query in design view. Switch to SQL view and copy/paste. An editor with column mode (like UltraEdit) will help create the query.
How do I append only distinct records from a master table to another table, when the master may have duplicates. Example - I only want the distinct records in the smaller table but I need to insert/append records to what I already have in the smaller table.
Ignoring any concurency issues:
insert into smaller (field, ... )
select distinct field, ... from bigger
except
select field, ... from smaller;
You can also rephrase it as a join:
insert into smaller (field, ... )
select distinct b.field, ...
from bigger b
left join smaller s on s.key = b.key
where s.key is NULL
If you don't like NOT EXISTS and EXCEPT/MINUS (cute, Remus!), you have also LEFT JOIN solution:
INSERT INTO smaller(a,b)
SELECT DISTINCT master.a, master.b FROM master
LEFT JOIN smaller ON smaller.a=master.a AND smaller.b=master.b
WHERE smaller.pkey IS NULL
You don't say the scale of the problem so I'll mention something I recently helped a friend with.
He works for an insurance company that provides supplemental Dental and Vision benefits management for other insurance companies. When they get a new client they also get a new database that can have 10's of millions of records. They wanted to identify all possible dupes with the data they already had in a master database of 100's of millions of records.
The solution we came up with was to identify two distinct combinations of field values (normalized in various ways) that would indicate a high probability of a dupe. We then created a new table containing MD5 hashes of the combos plus the id of the master record they applied to. The MD5 columns were indexed. All new records would have their combo hashes computed and if either of them had a collision with the master the new record would be kicked out to an exceptions file for some human to deal with it.
The speed of this surprised the hell out of us (in a nice way) and it has had a very acceptable false-positive rate.
You could use the distinct keyword to filter out duplicates:
insert into AnotherTable
(col1, col2, col3)
select distinct col1, col2, col3
from MasterTable
Based on Microsoft SQL Server and its Transact-SQL. Untested as always and the target_table has the same amount of rows as the source table (otherwise use columnnames between INSERT INTO and SELECT
INSERT INTO target_table
SELECT DISTINCT row1, row2
FROM source_table
WHERE NOT EXISTS(
SELECT row1, row2
FROM target_table)
Something like this would work for SQL Server (you don't mention what RDBMS you're using):
INSERT INTO table (col1, col2, col3)
SELECT DISTINCT t2.a, t2.b, t2.c
FROM table2 AS t2
WHERE NOT EXISTS (
SELECT 1
FROM table
WHERE table.col1 = t2.a AND table.col2 = t2.b AND table.col3 = t2.c
)
Tune where appropriate, depending on exactly what defines "distinctness" for your table.