I would like to know how to loop through each record in a database, and update them using a counter.
For instance, I have a large number of email fields. I would like to update them all using the pattern: 'hello+1#gmail.com', 'hello+2#gmail.com', 'hello+3#gmail.com', 'hello+4#gmail.com' ...
I tried to do this without SQL in my Rails console, but it would take too much time. Any suggestions on how to do this using SQL?
If you are using SQL server:
select <stuff>
,row_number() over (order by <something>) as row_number
from <things>
where <something>
Will do the trick. If not, let us know what you are using and we can go from there! Are you looking to put the '+Row_number' before the #? If so it should be a fairly simple matter of replacing the the '#' with '+4#' and so on.
In MySQL, you would use variables:
update table t
set email = concat('hello+', #rn := coalesce(#rn, 0) + 1, '#gmail.com');
If you have a particular ordering in mind, you can add an order by clause.
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 need to re-assign all SortID's, starting from 1 until MAX (SortID) from a subset of records of table Beleg, using SQL-92, after one of the SortID's has changed (for example from 444 to 444.1). I have tried several ways (for example SET #a:=0; UPDATE table SET field=#a:=#a+1 WHERE whatever='whatever' ORDER BY field2), but it didn't work, as these solutions all need a special kind of SQL, like SQLServer or Oracle, etc.
The SQL that I use is SQL-92, implemented in FileMaker (INSERT and UPDATE are available, though, but nothing fancy).
Thanks for any hint!
Gary
From what I know, SQL-92 is a standard and not a language. So you can say you are using T-SQL, which is mostly SQL-92 compliant, but you can't say I program SQL Server in SQL-92. The same applies to FileMaker.
I suppose you are trying to update your table through ODBC? The Update statement looks OK, but there are no variables if FileMaker SQL (and I am not sure using a variable inside query will give you result you expect, I think you will set SortId in every row to 1). You are thinking about doing something like Window functions with row() in TSQL, but I do not think this functionality is available.
The easiest solution is to use FileMaker, resetting the numbering for a column is really a trivial task which takes seconds. Do you need help with this?
Edit:
I was referring to TSQL functions rank() and row_number(), there is no row() function in TSQL
I finally got the answer from Ziggy Crueltyfree Zeitgeister on the Database Administrators copy of my question.
He suggested to break this down into multiple steps using a temporary table to store the results:
CREATE TABLE sorting (sid numeric(10,10), rn int);
INSERT INTO sorting (sid, rn)
SELECT SortID, RecordNumber FROM Beleg
WHERE Year ( Valuta ) = 2016
AND Ursprungskonto = 1210
ORDER BY SortID;
UPDATE Beleg SET SortID = (SELECT rn FROM sorting WHERE sid=Beleg.SortID)
WHERE Year ( Valuta ) = 2016
AND Ursprungskonto = 1210;
DROP TABLE sorting;
Of course! I just keep the table definition in Filemaker (let the type coercion be done by Filemaker this way), and filling and deleting from it with my function: RenumberSortID ().
Is there any possibility to write delete query inside Where clause.
Example:
Select ID,Name From MyTable Where ID IN(Delete From MyTable)
It may be crazy, but let me explain my situation. In our reporting tool, we are supporting to enter SQL where query.
We will use our own Select and From Clause query and combine the user's where query input.
Example:
Select ID,Name From MyTable Where ("Query typed by user")
Here, user can type any kind of where query filter..
If he types like ID=100 our final query becomes like this
Select ID,Name From MyTable Where (ID=100)
One of our customer asked us what will happen if anyone type the delete query as where query filter. he feels this may be the security hole..so we have tried that kind of possibility in our dev environment. But the sql returns error for the following query.
Select ID,Name From MyTable Where ID IN(Delete From MyTable)
So finally, my question is, is there any other possibility to write Delete Query inside Where clause or Select clause.. If it possible, how can I restrict it?
Yes. They can run a delete. They can type:
1 = 1; DELETE FROM MY_TABLE;
Or even worse in some ways, (since you should have backups):
1 = 0 UNION SELECT SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER, CREDIT_CARD_NUMBER, OTHER_SENSITIVE_DATA FROM MY_SENSITIVE_TABLE;
Now, in your case its hard to validate. Normally if you are just passing a value to filter on you can use parameterised sql to save yourself. You however also need to let the user select a column. In cases like these, usually we use a drop down to allow the user to select a predefined list of columns and then validate the column name server side. We give the user a text box to enter the value to match and then parameterise that.
It's not quite possible. But he can do something like this :
Select ID,Name From MyTable Where (ID=100); (DELETE FROM MyTable Where 1 = 1)
by using ID=100); (DELETE FROM MyTable Where 1 = 1 instead of ID=100
I believe what your customer is talking about is SQL injection, as long as you have taken appropriate methods to block other queries from running after your select statement is done, then you should have no problem in letting them type whatever it is that you want.
From my experience there is no way to delete anything when you are doing a select statement.
Just make sure you have query terminator characters so they don't write something like the following.
select column1,column2, from myTable where ID in (1,2); delete from my table
this would be a valid worry from your customer if you aren't taking proper steps to prevent sql injection from happening.
You could have your SQL reporting tool just not have update, or delete permission and just have it have Read permission. However, it is up to you guys have you handle your sql injection security.
I'm refactoring the data import procedure for an enterprise application and came across a snippet I'd like to find a better solution. When importing data we have to create a unique entity for each data set and there is a counter in a field to be used to assign this id sequentially. You read the field to get the next free id and increment it afterwards to prepare for the next time.
At the moment this is done in two steps in the original app, written in 'C':
SELECT idnext FROM mytable;
UPDATE mytable SET idnext = idnext + 1;
Obviously there is a race condition here, if multiple processes do the same thing.
Edit: Important corequisite: I can not touch the database/field definition, this rules out a sequence.
We are rewriting in perl, and I'd like to do the same thing, but better. An atomic solution would be nice. Unfortunately my SQL skills are limited, so I'm turning to collective wisdom :-)
In this particular case, a sequence is the right solution as mentioned. But if in some future situation you need to both update something and return a value in the same statement, you can use the RETURNING clause:
UPDATE atable SET foo = do_something_with(foo) RETURNING foo INTO ?
If the calling code is PL/SQL, replace the ? with a local PL/SQL variable; otherwise you can bind it as an output parameter in your program.
Edit: Since you mentioned Perl, something like this ought to work (untested):
my $sth = $dbh->prepare('UPDATE mytable SET idnext = idnext + 1 returning idnext into ?');
my $idnext;
$sth->bind_param_inout(1, \$idnext, 8);
$sth->execute; # now $idnext should contain the value
See DBI.
Why not use a sequence?
Create the sequence one time, using whatever START WITH value you want:
CREATE SEQUENCE mysequence
START WITH 1
MAXVALUE 999999999999999999999999999
MINVALUE 1
NOCYCLE
NOCACHE
NOORDER;
Then in your application code at runtime you can use this statement to get the next value:
SELECT mysequence.NEXTVAL
INTO idnext
FROM DUAL;
Update: Using a sequence would be the preferred method, but since you can't change the database then I agree that using RETURNING should work for your situation:
UPDATE mytable
SET idnext = idnext + 1
RETURNING idnext
INTO mylocalvariable;
Use SELECT FOR UPDATE statement. It guarantees mutually exclusive rights to the record :
"SELECT
FOR UPDATE;
A sequence will do the job, have a look at e.g. Oracle sequences
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.