I'm pretty sure this works universally across various SQL implementations. Suppose I have many-to-many relationship between 2 tables:
Customer: id, name
has many:
Order: id, description, total_price
and this relationship is in a junction table:
Customer_Order: order_date, customer_id, order_id
Now I want to write SQL query to join all of these together, mentioning the customer's name, the order's description and total price and the order date:
SELECT name, description, total_price FROM Customer
JOIN Customer_Order ON Customer_Order.customer_id = Customer.id
JOIN Order = Order.id = Customer_Order.order_id
This is all well and good. This query will also work if we change the order so it's FROM Customer_Order JOIN Customer or put the Order table first. Why is this the case? Somewhere I've read that JOIN works like an arithmetic operator (+, * etc.) taking 2 operands and you can chain operator together so you can have: 2+3+5, for example. Following this logic, first we have to calculate 2+3 and then take that result and add 5 to it. Is it the same with JOINs?
Is it that behind the hood, the first JOIN must first be completed in order for the second JOIN to take place? So basically, the first JOIN will create a table out of the 2 operands left and right of it. Then, the second JOIN will take that resulting table as its left operand and perform the usual joining. Basically, I want to understand how multiple JOINs work behind the hood.
In many ways I think ORMs are the bane of modern programming. Unleashing a barrage of underprepared coders. Oh well diatribe out of the way, You're asking a question about set theory. THere are potentially other options that center on relational algebra but SQL is fundamentally set theory based. here are a couple of links to get you started
Using set theory to understand SQL
A visual explanation of SQL
Related
Made this account just to ask about this question after being unable to find/expending the local resources I have, so I come to you all.
I'm trying to join two tables - ORDERS and CUSTOMER - as per a question on my assignment
For every order, list the order number and order date along with the customer number, last name, and first name of the customer who placed the order.
So I'm looking for the order number, date, customer number, and the full name of customers.
The code goes as such
SELECT ORDERS.ORDR_ORDER_NUMBER, ORDERS.ORDR_ORDER_DATE, ORDERS.ORDR_CUSTOMER_NUMBER, CUSTOMER.CUST_LAST, CUSTOMER.CUST_FIRST
FROM ORDERS, CUSTOMER
WHERE ORDERS.ORDR_CUSTOMER_NUMBER = CUSTOMER.CUST_CUSTOMER_NUMBER;
I've done this code without the table identifiers, putting quotation marks around ORDERS.ORDR_CUSTOMER_NUMBER, aliases for the two tables, and even putting a space after ORDR_ in both SELECT & WHERE for laughs and nothing's working. All of them keep coming up with the error in the title (ORA-00904), saying [ORDERS.]ORDR_CUSTOMER_NUMBER is the invalid identifier even though it shouldn't be.
Here also are the tables I'm working with, in case that context is needed for help.
Anyway, the query that produces the result you want should take the form:
select
o.ordr_order_number,
o.ordr_order_date,
c.cust_customer_number,
c.cust_last,
c.cust_first
from orders o
join customer c on c.cust_customer_number = o.ordr_customer_number
As you see the query becomes a lot easier to read and write if you use modern join syntax, and if you use table aliases (o and c).
You have to add JOIN or INNER JOIN to your query. Because the data comes from two different tables the WHERE clause will not select both.
FROM Orders INNER JOIN Customers ON Orders.order_Customer_Number = Customer.Cust_Customer_Number
After looking at example after example of both inner joins and subqueries as fields, I'm apparently not getting some aspect, and I would appreciate help please. I am trying to write one query that must, alas, run in MS Access 2007 to talk to an Oracle database. I have to get values from several different places for various bits of data. One of those bits of data is GROUP_CODE (e.g., faculty, staff, student, alum, etc.). Getting that is non-trivial. I am trying to use two inner joins to get the specific value. The value of borrower category must be the value for my main row in the outer query. Here is what this looks like:
Patron table Patron_Barcode table Patron_Group table
Patron_id Barcode Patron_Group_iD
Barcode Patron_Group_id PATRON_Group_Code
I want to get the PATRON_GROUP.PATRON_GROUP_CODE. This is only one of 35 fields I need to get in my query. (Yes, that's terrible, but wearing my librarian hat, i can't write the Java program I'd like to write to do this in a snap.)
So as a test, I wrote this query:
select PATRON.PATRON_ID As thePatron,
(SELECT PATRON_GROUP.PATRON_GROUP_CODE As borrowwerCategory
FROM (PATRON_GROUP
INNER JOIN PATRON_BARCODE ON PATRON_GROUP.PATRON_GROUP_ID = PATRON_BARCODE.PATRON_GROUP_ID
) INNER JOIN PATRON ON PATRON_BARCODE.PATRON_ID = thePatron.PATRON_ID
));
I don't know what I'm doing wrong, but this doesn't work. I've written a fair amount of SQL in my time, but never anything quite like this. What am I doing wrong?
PATRON.BARCODE is the foreign key for the BARCODE table.
PATRON_BARCODE.PATRON_GROUP_ID is the foreign key for the PATRON_GROUP table. PATRON_GROUP_CODE in PATRON_GROUP is he column value that I need.
PATRON.BARCODE -> BARCODE.PATRON_GROUP_ID -> PATRON_GROUP.PATRON_GROUP_CODR>
The main table, PATRON, will have lots of other things, like inner and outer join to PATRON_ADDRESS, etc., and I can't just do an inner join directly to what I want in my main query. This has to happen in a subquery as a field. Thanks.
Ken
Say you have these tables:
PHARMACY(**___id_pharmacy___**, name, addr, tel)
PHARMACIST(**___Insurance_number___**, name, surname, qualification, **id_pharmacy**)
SELLS(**___id_pharmacy___**, **___name___**, price)
DRUG(**___Name___**, chem_formula, **id_druggistshop**)
DRUGGISTSHOP(**___id_druggistshop___**, name, address)
I think this will be more specific.
So, I'm trying to construct an SQL statement, in which I will fetch the data from id_pharmacy and name FROM PHARMACY, the insurance_number, name, and surname columns from PHARMACIST, for all the pharmacies that sell the drug called Kronol.
And that's basically it. I know I'm missing the relationships in the code I wrote previously.
Note: Those column names which have underscores left and right to them are underlined(Primary keys).
The query you've written won't work in any DBMS that I know of.
You'll most likely want to use some combination of JOINs.
Since the exact schema isn't provided, consider this pseudo code, but hopefully it will get you on the right track.
SELECT PH.Ph_Number, PH.Name, PHCL.Ins_Number, PHCL.Name, PHCL.Surname
FROM PH
INNER JOIN PHCL ON PHCL.PH_Number = PH.Ph_Number
INNER JOIN MLIST ON MLIST.PH_Number = PH.PH_Number
WHERE MLIST.Name = "Andy"
I've obviously assumed some relationships between tables that may or may not exist, but hopefully this will be pretty close. The UNION operator won't work because you're selecting different columns and a different number of columns from the various tables. This is the wrong approach all together for what you're trying to do. It's also worth mentioning that a LEFT JOIN may or may not be a better option for you, depending on the exact requirements you're trying to meet.
Ok, try this query:
SELECT A.id_pharmacy, A.name AS PharmacyName, B.Insurance_number,
B.name AS PharmacistName, B.surname AS PharmacistSurname
FROM PHARMACY A
LEFT JOIN PHARMACIST B
ON A.id_pharmacy = B.id_pharmacy
WHERE A.id_pharmacy IN (SELECT id_pharmacy FROM SELLS WHERE name = 'Kronol')
I'm taking a database course this semester, and we're learning SQL. I understand most simple queries, but I'm having some difficulty using the count aggregate function.
I'm supposed to relate an advertisement number to a property number to a branch number so that I can tally up the amount of advertisements by branch number and compute their cost. I set up what I think are two appropriate new views, but I'm clueless as to what to write for the select statement. Am I approaching this the correct way? I have a feeling I'm over complicating this bigtime...
with ad_prop(ad_no, property_no, overseen_by) as
(select a.ad_no, a.property_no, p.overseen_by
from advertisement as a, property as p
where a.property_no = p.property_no)
with prop_branch(property_no, overseen_by, allocated_to) as
(select p.property_no, p.overseen_by, s.allocated_to
from property as p, staff as s
where p.overseen_by = s.staff_no)
select distinct pb.allocated_to as branch_no, count( ??? ) * 100 as ad_cost
from prop_branch as pb, ad_prop as ap
where ap.property_no = pb.property_no
group by branch_no;
Any insight would be greatly appreciated!
You could simplify it like this:
advertisement
- ad_no
- property_no
property
- property_no
- overseen_by
staff
- staff_no
- allocated_to
SELECT s.allocated_to AS branch, COUNT(*) as num_ads, COUNT(*)*100 as ad_cost
FROM advertisement AS a
INNER JOIN property AS p ON a.property_no = p.property_no
INNER JOIN staff AS s ON p.overseen_by = s.staff_no
GROUP BY s.allocated_to;
Update: changed above to match your schema needs
You can condense your WITH clauses into a single statement. Then, the piece I think you are missing is that columns referenced in the column definition have to be aggregated if they aren't included in the GROUP BY clause. So you GROUP BY your distinct column then apply your aggregation and math in your column definitions.
SELECT
s.allocated_to AS branch_no
,COUNT(a.ad_no) AS ad_count
,(ad_count * 100) AS ad_cost
...
GROUP BY s.allocated_to
i can tell you that you are making it way too complicated. It should be a select statement with a couple of joins. You should re-read the chapter on joins or take a look at the following link
http://www.sql-tutorial.net/SQL-JOIN.asp
A join allows you to "combine" the data from two tables based on a common key between the two tables (you can chain more tables together with more joins). Once you have this "joined" table, you can pretend that it is really one table (aliases are used to indicate where that column came from). You understand how aggregates work on a single table right?
I'd prefer not to give you the answer so that you can actually learn :)
Although I'm using Rails, this question is more about database design. I have several entities in my database, with the schema a bit like this: http://fishwebby.posterous.com/40423840
If I want to get a list of people and order it by surname, that's no problem. However, if I want to get a list of people, ordered by surname, enrolled in a particular group, I have to use an SQL statement that includes several joins across four tables, something like this:
SELECT group_enrolment.*, person.*
FROM person INNER JOIN member ON person.id = member.person_id
INNER JOIN enrolment ON member.id = enrolment.member_id
INNER JOIN group_enrolment ON enrolment.id = group_enrolment.enrolment_id
WHERE group_enrolment.id = 123
ORDER BY person.surname;
Although this works, it strikes me as a bit inefficient, and potentially as my schema grows, these queries could get more and more complicated.
Another option could be to join the person table to all the other tables in the query by including person_id in the other tables, then it would just be one single join, for example
SELECT group_enrolment.*, person.*
FROM person INNER JOIN group_enrolment ON group_enrolment.person_id
WHERE group_enrolment.id = 123
ORDER BY person.surname;
But this would mean that in my schema, the person table is joined to a lot of other tables. Aside from a complicated schema diagram, does anyone see any disadvantages to this?
I'd be very grateful for any comments on this - whether what I'm doing now (the many table join) or the second solution or another one that hasn't occurred to me is the best way to go.
Many thanks in advance
Well, joins are what databases do. Having said that, you may consider propagating natural keys in your model, which would then allow you to skip over some tables in joins. Take a look at this example.
EDIT
I'm not saying that this will match your model (problem), but just for fun try similar queries on something like this: