I'm attempting to create a parameterized where statement using COALESCE in SQL 2008, and I have the example of:
Select *
From Receipts
Where Receipts.FunctionCode = COALESCE(#FunCode, Receipts.FunctionCode)
in hope that if i pass in NULL in #FunCode, it will pull all 7050 records. However its only pulling back 236 records, and same as if the where was this:
Where Receipts.FunctionCode = Receipts.FunctionCode
Can someone explain what logic is wrong for me? To me, this where statement should always pull 100% back the database
That is due to the NULL values present in the FunctionCode column try this instead. This will use index created on FunctionCode if any
Select *
From Receipts
Where Receipts.FunctionCode = #FunCode or #FunCode IS NULL
Related
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 am in the process of porting over some data from a SQL environment to my MongoDB backend. I'm familiar with using a NULL check with your SELECT statement, like so:
SELECT * FROM clients WHERE note is not NULL ORDER BY id_number
... but in this old SQL database table I'm noticing a lot of rows where the value is not null, it's simply empty. It would be pointless to port these across. So what would it look like to prevent pulling those over -- in terms of the SELECT statement syntax?
To clarify "note" values are of type varchar. In JavaScript I would just guard against an empty string " ". Is there a way to do this with a SQL statement?
Something like that :
SELECT * FROM clients
WHERE note is not NULL
AND TRIM(note) <> ''
ORDER BY id_number;
first off, noob alert! :))
I need to construct a query that runs on many tables. The tables vary on name just on the last digits as per client code. The thing is, the values that change aren't sequential so looping as in i=1,2,3,... does not work. A possible solution would be to have those values on a given field on an other table.
Here is the code for the first two clients 015 and 061. The leading zero(s) must are essential.
SELECT LnMov2017015.CConta, RsMov2017015.DR, RsMov2017015.NInt, "015" AS CodCli
FROM LnMov2017015 INNER JOIN RsMov2017015 ON LnMov2017015.NReg = RsMov2017015.NReg
WHERE (((LnMov2017015.CConta)="6" And (LnMov2017015.CConta)="7") AND ((RsMov2017015.DR)=9999))
UNION SELECT LnMov2017061.CConta, RsMov2017061.DR, RsMov2017061.NInt, "061" AS CodCli
FROM LnMov2017061 INNER JOIN RsMov2017061 ON LnMov2017061.NReg = RsMov2017061.NReg
WHERE (((LnMov2017061.CConta)="6" And (LnMov2017061.CConta)="7") AND ((RsMov2017061.DR)=9999))
...
So for the first SELECT the table Name is LnMov2017015, the ending 015 being the value, the client code, that changes from table to table e.g. in the second SELECT the table name is LnMov2017061 (061) being what distinguishes the table.
For each client code there are two tables e.g. LnMov2017015 and RsMov2017015 (LnMov2017061 and RsMov2017061 for the second set client shown).
Is there a way that I can build the SQL, based upon the example SQL above?
Does anyone have an idea for a solution? :)
Apparently it is possible to build a query object to read data in another db without establishing table link. Just tested and to my surprise it works. Example:
SELECT * FROM [SoilsAgg] IN "C:\Users\Owner\June\DOT\Lab\Editing\ConstructionData.accdb";
I was already using this structure in VBA to execute DELETE and UPDATE action statements.
Solution found :)
Thank you all for your input.
Instead of linking 100 tables (password protected), I'll access them with SLQ
FROM Table2 IN '' ';database=C:\db\db2.mdb;PWD=mypwd'
And merge them all with a query, before any other thing!
The following query on my oracle db gives results that look fine when run in SQL Developer.
select *
from guideline$ a left outer join textfragment$ t
on (a.TEXTFRAGMENT_CODE = t.TEXTFRAGMENT$_CODE)
start with a.knowledge$_Code = 71122 and a.guideline$_pcode is null
connect by prior a.guideline$_Code = a.guideline$_pcode
order SIBLINGS by a.tag_order
All rows are populated correctly. When the same exact query is ran in my program using OleDbReader.ExecuteReader() some of the rows contain a null value for a specific column when they didn't in my SQL Developer results. The data type of that column is CLOB. I can not see any pattern as to why some of the rows have a null value and some do not.
Not sure what other information would be helpful...
Does anyone have any ideas on what might be going on?
Your problem may be related to the way that binary data is retrieved with OleDbDataReader.
You should use GetBytes(), and follow this article.
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